Identification and impact of outcome selection bias in meta‐analysis
Top Cited Papers
- 6 December 2004
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Statistics in Medicine
- Vol. 24 (10), 1547-1561
- https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.2025
Abstract
The systematic review community has become increasingly aware of the importance of addressing the issues of heterogeneity and publication bias in meta‐analyses. A potentially bigger threat to the validity of a meta‐analysis appears relatively unnoticed. The within‐study selective reporting of outcomes, defined as the selection of a subset of the original variables recorded for inclusion in publication of trials, can theoretically have a substantial impact on the results. A cohort of meta‐analyses on the Cochrane Library was reviewed to examine how often this form of within‐study publication bias was suspected and explained some of the evident funnel plot asymmetry. In cases where the level of suspicion was high, sensitivity analysis was undertaken to assess the robustness of the conclusion to this bias. Although within‐study selection was evident or suspected in several trials, the impact on the conclusions of the meta‐analyses was minimal. This paper deals with the identification of, sensitivity analysis for, and impact of within‐study selective reporting in meta‐analysis. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Investigation of within‐study selective reporting in clinical research: follow‐up of applications submitted to a local research ethics committeeJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 2002
- Assessing the potential for bias in meta-analysis due to selective reporting of subgroup analyses within studiesStatistics in Medicine, 2000
- Bias in Meta-Analysis Due to Outcome Variable Selection Within StudiesJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C: Applied Statistics, 2000
- Empirical assessment of effect of publication bias on meta-analysesBMJ, 2000
- Trim and Fill: A Simple Funnel‐Plot–Based Method of Testing and Adjusting for Publication Bias in Meta‐AnalysisBiometrics, 2000
- A Nonparametric “Trim and Fill” Method of Accounting for Publication Bias in Meta-AnalysisJournal of the American Statistical Association, 2000
- Content and quality of 2000 controlled trials in schizophrenia over 50 yearsBMJ, 1998
- Human albumin administration in critically ill patients: systematic review of randomised controlled trials Why albumin may not workBMJ, 1998
- An amnesty for unpublished trialsBMJ, 1997
- Publication bias and clinical trialsControlled Clinical Trials, 1987