OBJECTIVE: Publication bias threatens the validity of published research, although this topic has received little attention in psychiatry. The purpose of this article is to produce a systematic overview of the causes and consequences of publication bias and to summarize the available methods with which it is detected and corrected. METHOD: Empirical evidence for the existence of publication bias is reviewed and the following methods are applied to an illustrative case example from psychiatry: funnel plot analysis; the 'file drawer method'; linear regression techniques; rank correlation; 'trim and fill'. RESULTS: Small studies are particularly susceptible to publication and related bias. All methods to detect publication bias depend upon the availability of a number of individual studies with a range of sample sizes. Unfortunately, large numbers of studies of varying sample size are not always available in many areas of psychiatric research. CONCLUSION: Where possible researchers should always test for the presence of publication bias. The problem of publication bias will not be solved by anything other than a prospective trials register.
OBJECTIVE: Publication bias threatens the validity of published research, although this topic has received little attention in psychiatry. The purpose of this article is to produce a systematic overview of the causes and consequences of publication bias and to summarize the available methods with which it is detected and corrected. METHOD: Empirical evidence for the existence of publication bias is reviewed and the following methods are applied to an illustrative case example from psychiatry: funnel plot analysis; the 'file drawer method'; linear regression techniques; rank correlation; 'trim and fill'. RESULTS: Small studies are particularly susceptible to publication and related bias. All methods to detect publication bias depend upon the availability of a number of individual studies with a range of sample sizes. Unfortunately, large numbers of studies of varying sample size are not always available in many areas of psychiatric research. CONCLUSION: Where possible researchers should always test for the presence of publication bias. The problem of publication bias will not be solved by anything other than a prospective trials register.
Authors: Nathan A Fox; Marian J Bakermans-Kranenburg; Kathryn H Yoo; Lindsay C Bowman; Erin N Cannon; Ross E Vanderwert; Pier F Ferrari; Marinus H van IJzendoorn Journal: Psychol Bull Date: 2015-12-21 Impact factor: 17.737
Authors: Sohail Bampoe; Peter M Odor; Ahilanandan Dushianthan; Elliott Bennett-Guerrero; Suzie Cro; Tong J Gan; Michael Pw Grocott; Michael Fm James; Michael G Mythen; Catherine Mn O'Malley; Anthony M Roche; Kathy Rowan; Edward Burdett Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-09-21
Authors: Ashley M Groh; R Pasco Fearon; Marian J Bakermans-Kranenburg; Marinus H van Ijzendoorn; Ryan D Steele; Glenn I Roisman Journal: Attach Hum Dev Date: 2014-02-18
Authors: Marije Stoltenborgh; Marian J Bakermans-Kranenburg; Marinus H van Ijzendoorn Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2012-07-15 Impact factor: 4.328