Detecting and correcting for publication bias in meta-analysis - A truncated normal distribution approach

被引:8
作者
Zhu, Qiaohao [1 ]
Carriere, K. C. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Alberta, Dept Math & Stat Sci, Edmonton, AB T6G 2G1, Canada
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会;
关键词
Maximum likelihood; meta-analysis; method of moments; publication bias; selection methods; Trim and Fill; truncated normal distribution; SENSITIVITY-ANALYSIS; LUNG-CANCER; FILL METHOD; MODELS; TRIM; RATES;
D O I
10.1177/0962280216684671
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Publication bias can significantly limit the validity of meta-analysis when trying to draw conclusion about a research question from independent studies. Most research on detection and correction for publication bias in meta-analysis focus mainly on funnel plot-based methodologies or selection models. In this paper, we formulate publication bias as a truncated distribution problem, and propose new parametric solutions. We develop methodologies of estimating the underlying overall effect size and the severity of publication bias. We distinguish the two major situations, in which publication bias may be induced by: (1) small effect size or (2) large p-value. We consider both fixed and random effects models, and derive estimators for the overall mean and the truncation proportion. These estimators will be obtained using maximum likelihood estimation and method of moments under fixed- and random-effects models, respectively. We carried out extensive simulation studies to evaluate the performance of our methodology, and to compare with the non-parametric Trim and Fill method based on funnel plot. We find that our methods based on truncated normal distribution perform consistently well, both in detecting and correcting publication bias under various situations.
引用
收藏
页码:2722 / 2741
页数:20
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], META META ANAL R R P
[2]  
[Anonymous], J MODERN APPL STAT M
[3]   OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS OF A BANK CORRELATION TEST FOR PUBLICATION BIAS [J].
BEGG, CB ;
MAZUMDAR, M .
BIOMETRICS, 1994, 50 (04) :1088-1101
[4]   A comparison of statistical methods for meta-analysis [J].
Brockwell, SE ;
Gordon, IR .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2001, 20 (06) :825-840
[5]   A bound for publication bias based on the fraction of unpublished studies [J].
Copas, J ;
Jackson, D .
BIOMETRICS, 2004, 60 (01) :146-153
[6]   What works?: selectivity models and meta-analysis [J].
Copas, J .
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES A-STATISTICS IN SOCIETY, 1999, 162 :95-109
[7]   Reanalysis of epidemiological evidence on lung cancer and passive smoking [J].
Copas, JB ;
Shi, JQ .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 320 (7232) :417-418
[8]   A sensitivity analysis for publication bias in systematic reviews [J].
Copas, JB ;
Shi, JQ .
STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2001, 10 (04) :251-265
[9]   A likelihood-based sensitivity analysis for publication bias in meta-analysis [J].
Copas, John B. .
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES C-APPLIED STATISTICS, 2013, 62 (01) :47-66
[10]   EFFECT OF POSITIVE FINDINGS ON SUBMISSION AND ACCEPTANCE RATES - A NOTE ON METAANALYSIS BIAS [J].
COURSOL, A ;
WAGNER, EE .
PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY-RESEARCH AND PRACTICE, 1986, 17 (02) :136-137