Published 26 August 2009, doi:10.1136/bmj.b3272
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;339:b3272

Editorials

New methods to deal with publication bias

Are helpful, but prevention is better than cure

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Published and retrievable reports of research do not necessarily represent the research performed, and some research findings never reach the consumer. Positive findings—or those that are perceived to be positive—are more likely to be published, and in more prestigious journals, than are negative findings.¹ This so called publication bias is an important factor to consider when searching for data and using it to make evidence based decisions. In the linked study (doi:10.1136/bmj.b2981), Moreno and colleagues test the performance of new methods of detecting and correcting for publication bias.²

Data collated for a meta-analysis can be investigated for possible missing studies using a funnel plot,^{2 3} on which Moreno and colleagues’ method is also based. It is a plot of effect size (for example, relative risk) versus the precision of a trial’s effect estimate (for example, number of patients or standard error). Typically, data points lie in a funnel shaped . . . [Full text of this article]

¹ Department of Primary Medical Care, University Medical Centre, 20246 Hamburg, Germany

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Novel methods to deal with publication biases: secondary analysis of antidepressant trials in the FDA trial registry database and related journal publications

Santiago G Moreno, Alex J Sutton, Erick H Turner, Keith R Abrams, Nicola J Cooper, Tom M Palmer, and A E Ades
BMJ 2009 339: b2981. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

The case of the misleading funnel plot

Joseph Lau, John P A Ioannidis, Norma Terrin, Christopher H Schmid, and Ingram Olkin
BMJ 2006 333: 597-600. [Full Text] [PDF]

Principles for international registration of protocol information and results from human trials of health related interventions: Ottawa statement (part 1)

Karmela Krleza-Jeric, An-Wen Chan, Kay Dickersin, Ida Sim, Jeremy Grimshaw, Christian Gluud for the Ottawa Group
BMJ 2005 330: 956-958. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects

Jerome M Stern and R John Simes
BMJ 1997 315: 640-645. [Abstract] [Full Text]

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

New form of funnel plot presentation

Vasiliy V Vlassov
bmj.com, 29 Aug 2009 [Full text]

Online poll

Find out more here>> and here>>