Original article
Bias in meta-analytic research

https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(92)90072-UGet rights and content

Abstract

With the proliferation of meta-analyses in the medical literature have come conflicting studies. In addition, observance of guidelines for the performance of meta-analyses has been spotty. Bias may explain conflicting studies and differentiate carefully performed meta-analyses from others. Meta-analysts may fail to anticipate biases which threaten their study's validity. The three stages at which bias can be injected into a meta-analysis are finding studies, selection of the identified studies for the meta-analysis and extraction of data from the selected studies. This manuscript reviews specific types of bias which are common at each of these stages.

References (32)

  • D.T. Felson et al.

    Evidence for the superiority of immunosuppressive drugs and prednisone over prednisone alone in lupus nephritis: results of a pooled analysis

    N Engl J Med

    (1984)
  • H.S. Sacks et al.

    Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials

    N Engl J Med

    (1987)
  • J.M. Last
  • G.V. Glass et al.

    Meta-analysis in Social Research

    (1987)
  • R.J. Simes

    Publication bias: The case for an international registry of clinical trials

    J Clin Oncol

    (1986)
  • C.B. Begg et al.

    Publication bias and dissemination of clinical research

    J Natl Cancer Inst

    (1989)
  • Cited by (186)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text