Extent, awareness and perception of dissemination bias in qualitative research: An explorative survey

PLoS ONE

Volumn 11, Issue 8, 2016, Pages

  Toews, Ingrid ^a   Glenton, Claire ^b   Lewin, Simon ^b,c   Berg, Rigmor C ^b,d   Noyes, Jane ^e   Booth, Andrew ^f   Marusic, Ana ^g   Malicki, Mario ^g   Munthe Kaas, Heather M ^b   Meerpohl, Joerg J ^h  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

^b NORWEGIAN INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (Norway)

^c SOUTH AFRICAN MEDICAL RESEARCH COUNCIL   (South Africa)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TROMSØ   (Norway)

^e BANGOR UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^f UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^g UNIVERSITY OF SPLIT   (Croatia)

^h PARIS DESCARTES UNIVERSITY   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AWARENESS; CONTROLLED STUDY; EDITOR; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; PERCEPTION; PUBLICATION; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SAMPLING; SCIENTIST; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; ADULT; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PEER REVIEW; PERSONNEL; PSYCHOLOGY; PUBLISHING; QUESTIONNAIRE; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

ADULT; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DECISION MAKING; EDITORIAL POLICIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; PUBLICATION BIAS; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RESEARCH PERSONNEL; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84983672101     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159290     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Bohren MA, Hunter EC, Munthe-Kaas HM, Souza JP, Vogel JP, Gulmezoglu AM. Facilitators and barriers to facility-based delivery in low- and middle-income countries: a qualitative evidence synthesis. Reprod Health. 2014; 11(1):71. doi: 10.1186/742-4755-11-71 PMID: 25238684
2. Gulmezoglu AM, Chandler J, Shepperd S, Pantoja T. Reviews of qualitative evidence: a new milestone for Cochrane. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2013; 11:ED000073. doi: org/10.1002/14651858.ED000073 PMID: 24524152
3. Lewin S, Bosch-Capblanch X, Oliver S, Akl EA, Vist GE, Lavis JN, et al. Guidance for Evidence-Informed Policies about Health Systems: Assessing How Much Confidence to Place in the Research Evidence. PLoS Medicine. 2012; 9(3):e1001187. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001187 PMID: 22448147
4. Longworth L, Sculpher MJ, Bojke L, Tosh JC. Bridging the gap between methods research and the needs of policy makers: A review of the research priorities of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2011; 27(02):180-7.
5. Mays N, Pope C, Popay J. Systematically reviewing qualitative and quantitative evidence to inform management and policy-making in the health field. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy. 2005; 10(suppl 1):6-20.
6. Pope C, Mays N. Qualitative research in health care. 3rd ed. ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.; 2006.
7. Hannes K, Macaitis K. A move to more systematic and transparent approaches in qualitative evidence synthesis: update on a review of published papers. Qualitative Research. 2012; 12(4):402-42.
8. Noyes J, Popay J, Pearson A, Hannes K, Booth A. Qualitative research and Cochrane reviews. In: Higgins J, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011.
9. Riese H, Carlsen B, Glenton C. Qualitative research synthesis: How the whole can be greater than the sum of parts. Antropology in Action. 2014; 21:22-30.
10. Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA, Bloom J, Chan A-W, Cronin E, et al. Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias. PLoS ONE. 2008; 3(8):e3081. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0003081 PMID: 18769481
11. Dwan K, Altman DG, Clarke M, Gamble C, Higgins JPT, Sterne JAC, et al. Evidence for the Selective Reporting of Analyses and Discrepancies in Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review of Cohort Studies of Clinical Trials. PLoS Medicine. 2014; 11(6):e1001666. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001666 PMID: 24959719
12. Franco A, Malhotra N, Simonovits G. Publication bias in the social sciences: Unlocking the file drawer. Science. 2014; 345(6203):1502-5. doi: 10.1126/science.1255484 PMID: 25170047
13. Petticrew M, Egan M, Thomson H, Hamilton V, Kunkler R, Roberts H. Publication bias in qualitative research: what becomes of qualitative research presented at conferences? J Epidemiol Community Health. 2008; 62(6):552-4. doi: 10.1136/jech.2006.059394 PMID: 18477755
14. Song F, Parekh S, Hooper L, Loke YK, Ryder J, Sutton AJ, et al. Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases. Health technology assessment (Winchester, England). 2010; 14(8):iii, ix-xi, 1-193.
15. Chan A-W, Song F, Vickers A, Jefferson T, Dickersin K, Gøtzsche PC, et al. Increasing value and reducing waste: addressing inaccessible research. The Lancet. 2014; 383(9913):257-66.
16. Lewin S, Glenton C, Munthe-Kaas H, Carlsen B, Colvin CJ, Gülmezoglu M, et al. Using Qualitative Evidence in Decision Making for Health and Social Interventions: An Approach to Assess Confidence in Findings from Qualitative Evidence Syntheses (GRADE-CERQual). PLoS Medicine. 2015; 12(10):e1001895. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001895 PMID: 26506244
17. Malicki M, Marusic A, Consortium O. Is there a solution to publication bias? Researchers call for changes in dissemination of clinical research results. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014; 67(10):1103-10. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.06.002 PMID: 25034197
18. Wong SS, Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB. Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically relevant qualitative studies in MEDLINE. Studies in health technology and informatics. 2004; 107(Pt 1):311-6. PMID: 15360825
19. R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria.: the R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2011.
20. Creswell JW. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 4th ed. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.; 2013 2013.
21. Epley N, Dunning D. Feeling "holier than thou": Are self-serving assessments produced by errors in self- or social prediction? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2000; 79(6):861-75. PMID: 11138757
22. Blümle A, Meerpohl JJ, Schumacher M, von Elm E. Fate of Clinical Research Studies after Ethical Approval - Follow-Up of Study Protocols until Publication. PLoS ONE. 2014; 9(2):e87184. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087184 PMID: 24586265
23. Dwan K, Gamble C, Williamson PR, Kirkham JJ, the Reporting Bias G. Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias - An Updated Review. PLoS ONE. 2013; 8(7):e66844. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0066844 PMID: 23861749
24. Schmucker C, Schell LK, Portalupi S, Oeller P, Cabrera L, Bassler D, et al. Extent of non-publication in cohorts of studies approved by research ethics committees or included in trial registries. PLoS ONE. 2014; 9(12):e114023. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0114023. eCollection 2014 PMID: 25536072
25. Scherer RW, Ugarte-Gil C, Schmucker C, Meerpohl JJ. Authors report lack of time as main reason for unpublished research presented at biomedical conferences: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015; 68(7):803-10. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.01.027 PMID: 25797837
26. Meerpohl JJ, Schell LK, Bassler D, Gallus S, Kleijnen J, Kulig M, et al. Evidence-informed recommendations to reduce dissemination bias in clinical research: conclusions from the OPEN (Overcome failure to Publish nEgative fiNdings) project based on an international consensus meeting. BMJ open. 2015; 5(5):e006666. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006666 PMID: 25943371
27. Fu Y, McNichol E, Marczewski K, Closs SJ. Patient-professional partnerships and chronic back pain self-management: a qualitative systematic review and synthesis. Health & Social Care in the Community. 2015:n/a-n/a.
28. Teixeira Rodrigues A, Roque F, Falcao A, Figueiras A, Herdeiro MT. Understanding physician antibiotic prescribing behaviour: a systematic review of qualitative studies. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2013; 41(3):203-12. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2012.09.003 Epub Nov 3. PMID: 23127482
29. Satink T, Cup EH, Ilott I, Prins J, de Swart BJ, Nijhuis-van der Sanden MW. Patients' views on the impact of stroke on their roles and self: a thematic synthesis of qualitative studies. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013; 94(6):1171-83. doi: 10.016/j.apmr.2013.01.011 Epub Jan 18. PMID: 23337428
30. Chang L, Krosnick JA. Comparing Oral Interviewing with Self-Administered Computerized QuestionnairesAn Experiment. Public Opinion Quarterly. 2010; 74(1):154-67.