The appropriateness of asymmetry tests for publication bias in meta-analyses: a large survey
Loading...
Date
Authors
Ioannidis, J. P.
Trikalinos, T. A.
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Type
Type of the conference item
Journal type
peer-reviewed
Educational material type
Conference Name
Journal name
CMAJ
Book name
Book series
Book edition
Alternative title / Subtitle
Description
BACKGROUND: Statistical tests for funnel-plot asymmetry are common in meta-analyses. Inappropriate application can generate misleading inferences about publication bias. We aimed to measure, in a survey of meta-analyses, how frequently the application of these tests would be not meaningful or inappropriate. METHODS: We evaluated all meta-analyses of binary outcomes with e 3 studies in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2003, issue 2). A separate, restricted analysis was confined to the largest meta-analysis in each of the review articles. In each meta-analysis, we assessed whether criteria to apply asymmetry tests were met: no significant heterogeneity, I2 < 50%, e 10 studies (with statistically significant results in at least 1) and ratio of the maximal to minimal variance across studies > 4. We performed a correlation and 2 regression asymmetry tests and evaluated their concordance. Finally, we sampled 60 meta-analyses from print journals in 2005 that cited use of the standard regression test. RESULTS: A total of 366 of 6873 (5%) and 98 of 846 meta-analyses (12%) in the wider and restricted Cochrane data set, respectively, would have qualified for use of asymmetry tests. Asymmetry test results were significant in 7%-18% of the meta-analyses. Concordance between the 3 tests was modest (estimated k 0.33-0.66). Of the 60 journal meta-analyses, 7 (12%) would qualify for asymmetry tests; all 11 claims for identification of publication bias were made in the face of large and significant heterogeneity. INTERPRETATION: Statistical conditions for employing asymmetry tests for publication bias are absent from most meta-analyses; yet, in medical journals these tests are performed often and interpreted erroneously.
Description
Keywords
*Data Interpretation, Statistical, Databases, Bibliographic, Humans, *Meta-Analysis as Topic, Periodicals as Topic, *Publication Bias
Subject classification
Citation
Link
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17420491
http://www.cmaj.ca/content/176/8/1091.full.pdf
http://www.cmaj.ca/content/176/8/1091.full.pdf
Language
en
Publishing department/division
Advisor name
Examining committee
General Description / Additional Comments
Institution and School/Department of submitter
Πανεπιστήμιο Ιωαννίνων. Σχολή Επιστημών Υγείας. Τμήμα Ιατρικής