SHOULD UNPUBLISHED DATA BE INCLUDED IN METAANALYSES - CURRENT CONVICTIONS AND CONTROVERSIES

被引:307
作者
COOK, DJ
GUYATT, GH
RYAN, G
CLIFTON, J
BUCKINGHAM, L
WILLAN, A
MCLLROY, W
OXMAN, AD
机构
[1] MCMASTER UNIV, FAC HLTH SCI, DEPT MED, HAMILTON L8N 3Z5, ONTARIO, CANADA
[2] MCMASTER UNIV, FAC HLTH SCI, DEPT FAMILY MED, HAMILTON L8N 3Z5, ONTARIO, CANADA
[3] SIR CHARLES GAIRDNER HOSP, DEPT AGRON, NEDLANDS, WA 6009, AUSTRALIA
[4] ONTARIO MINIST HLTH, TORONTO M5W 1R5, ONTARIO, CANADA
来源
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION | 1993年 / 269卷 / 21期
关键词
D O I
10.1001/jama.269.21.2749
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective.-To identify the extent to which meta-analyses currently include unpublished data and whether editors, meta-analysts, and methodologists believe unpublished material should be included. Design.-This article describes two related studies: a literature review and a cross-sectional survey. Sample Selection.-For the literature review, we identified all articles indexed by the key word meta-analysis from January 1989 to February 1991 and determined whether unpublished material had been searched for, obtained, and included in the meta-analyses. For the cross-sectional survey, we surveyed authors of these meta-analyses, authors of articles addressing methodological issues in meta-analysis published during the same period, and editors of journals in which both types of articles were published. Intervention.-We asked the respondents about their attitudes concerning inclusion of unpublished data and publication of articles from which data had previously been included in a scientific overview. Main Outcome Measures.-Inclusion of unpublished data and opinions about whether unpublished material should be included in overviews and whether prior inclusion of data in an overview should bear on publication. Results.-Of 150 meta-analyses, 46 (30.7%) included unpublished data in their primary analysis. Of authors surveyed, 85% responded. Of the meta-analysts and methodologists, 77.7% felt that unpublished material should definitely or probably be included in scientific overviews; this was true of 46.9% of the editors. A total of 86.4% of the meta-analysts and methodologists and 53.2% of the editors felt that inclusion of data in a prior overview should have no bearing on full publication of original research. Conclusion.-While inclusion of unpublished data in scientific overviews remains controversial, most investigators directly involved in meta-analysis believe that unpublished data should not be systematically excluded. The most valid synthesis of available information will result when meta-analysts subject published and unpublished material to the same rigorous methodological evaluation and present results with and without unpublished sources of data.
引用
收藏
页码:2749 / 2753
页数:5
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]   PUBLICATION BIAS AND DISSEMINATION OF CLINICAL RESEARCH [J].
BEGG, CB ;
BERLIN, JA .
JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 1989, 81 (02) :107-115
[2]  
BERLIN JA, 1989, J AM STAT ASSOC, V84, P381
[3]  
BERLIN JA, 1992, ONLINE J CURR CLIN T
[4]  
CHALMERS TC, 1965, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V49, P22
[5]  
CICCHETTI DV, 1976, YALE J BIOL MED, V49, P373
[6]   NOSOCOMIAL PNEUMONIA AND THE ROLE OF GASTRIC PH - A METAANALYSIS [J].
COOK, DJ ;
LAINE, LA ;
GUYATT, GH ;
RAFFIN, TA .
CHEST, 1991, 100 (01) :7-13
[7]   FACTORS INFLUENCING PUBLICATION OF RESEARCH RESULTS - FOLLOW-UP OF APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED TO 2 INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS [J].
DICKERSIN, K ;
MIN, YI ;
MEINERT, CL .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1992, 267 (03) :374-378
[8]   THE EXISTENCE OF PUBLICATION BIAS AND RISK-FACTORS FOR ITS OCCURRENCE [J].
DICKERSIN, K .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1990, 263 (10) :1385-1389
[9]   PUBLICATION BIAS AND CLINICAL-TRIALS [J].
DICKERSIN, K ;
CHAN, S ;
CHALMERS, TC ;
SACKS, HS ;
SMITH, H .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1987, 8 (04) :343-353
[10]   WHY REGISTER CLINICAL-TRIALS - REVISITED [J].
DICKERSIN, K .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1992, 13 (02) :170-177