What question did this study set out to answer?

To evaluate the extent to which systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in major anesthesia journals discuss, evaluate, and adjust for publication bias.

September 17, 2016Anesthesia & AnalgesiaOpen Access

Publication Bias: The Elephant in the Review

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

To evaluate the extent to which systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in major anesthesia journals discuss, evaluate, and adjust for publication bias.
Evaluated adherence to PRISMA reporting guidelines and publication bias assessments across N=207 systematic reviews from major anesthesia journals.
Identified analytical methods utilized to test for reporting bias, including funnel plot symmetry and regression techniques.
Of the N=207 included systematic reviews, 114 (55%) discussed publication bias and only 89 (43%) formally evaluated it.
Compliance with PRISMA reporting guidelines was documented in only 68 (33%) of the examined reviews.
Adjustments for publication bias yielded meaningful differences in pooled treatment effect estimates in approximately 2 to 5 reviews among those synthesizing more than 10 randomized trials.

Discussion

No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.

Implication

Methodological review reveals that only 43% of anesthesia systematic reviews assess publication bias, highlighting threats to overall treatment effect estimates.

Cite This Study

Dalton et al. (2016) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a79dce2756812e395894d87 https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000001596

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Implication

Methodological review reveals that only 43% of anesthesia systematic reviews assess publication bias, highlighting threats to overall treatment effect estimates.

Publication Bias: The Elephant in the Review

Key Points

Discussion

Implication

Cite This Study

Publication Bias: The Elephant in the Review

Key Points

Discussion

Implication

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider