Publication and related bias in meta-analysis: power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature.

By J. Sterne, D. Gavaghan, Matthias Egger. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2000

2,226 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3f729900f4f2a1ae5d086fc8e8a1ab74ff020faa

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Effects of Exercise Training on Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Biomarkers of Cardiometabolic Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials (2015, methodology): “10).(35) All statistical analyses were performed with Stata statistical software version 12 (Stata Corp).”
Evidence on the long-term effects of breastfeeding SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS AND META-ANALYSES (2007, methodology): “We did not use the Begg test (38) because the regression method (Egger’s test) showed a better performance for detection of funnel plot asymmetry (39).”
The Relationship Between Sample Sizes and Effect Sizes in Systematic Reviews in Education (2009, background): “The main reason advanced by methodologists for effects of small samples in experimental studies in medicine is that publication bias is more serious in small sample research than in studies with large samples (Givens et al., 1997; Rothstein, Sutton, & Borenstein, 2005; Sterne et al., 2000; Taylor & ”
Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy for Social Anxiety (2018, neutral): “Further, small studies are regularly selected for publication because of their statistically significant results (Sterne et al. , 2000).”
Perspectives on Evidence-Based Research in Education—What Works? Issues in Synthesizing Educational Program Evaluations (2008, background): “And because of confounding with teacher and school effects as well as publication bias, these small randomized studies tend to be biased toward positive outcomes (Givens et al., 1997; Sterne et al., 2000).”
Imputing missing standard deviations in meta-analyses can provide accurate results. (2006, background): “Unfortunately, not only does such a practice defeat the primary purpose of a systematic review to amalgamate all the available evidence to derive the most narrow, precise estimate possible of a treatment effect [17], but also may lead to a biased point estimate of a treatment effect as studies with ”
Can At-Risk Youth Be Diverted From Crime? (2016, neutral): “Related to this is the issue of small study effects; the finding that small studies often show larger treat-ment effects than do large-scale studies (Sterne, gavaghan, & Egger, 2000).”
Essential Medical Statistics (2003, methodology): “This test is equivalent to a regression of the log odds ratio against standard error (Sterne et al. 2000).”
Quantifying Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis (2017, methodology): “…bias tests have been widely used in meta-analysis applications, they may suffer from inflated type I error rate or poor power in certain simulation settings (Sterne et al., 2000; Terrin et al., 2003; Peters © 2017, The International Biometric Society 785 et al., 2006, 2007; Rücker et al., 2008).”