Literature DB >> 19353515

Published versus unpublished dissertations in psycho-oncology intervention research.

Anne Moyer1, Stefan Schneider, Sarah K Knapp-Oliver, Stephanie J Sohl.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: There are conflicting views regarding whether gray literature, including unpublished doctoral dissertations, should be included in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Although publication status frequently is used as a proxy for study quality, some research suggests that dissertations are often of superior quality to published studies.
METHODS: We examined 107 projects involving doctoral dissertations (42 published, 65 unpublished) that studied psychosocial interventions for cancer patients.
RESULTS: Published dissertations were more likely to be supported by research funding but were not more likely than unpublished dissertations to examine specific types of interventions. Across several indices of methodological quality there were minimal differences. Dissertations with significant findings tended to be more likely to be published than those without significant findings.
CONCLUSIONS: Unpublished dissertations focusing on psychosocial interventions for cancer patients are not necessarily of vastly inferior quality to those that eventually are published. Because doctoral dissertations are easy to access relative to other forms of gray literature, are free from some types of bias, and are reported thoroughly, they merit inclusion in comprehensive literature reviews.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 19353515      PMCID: PMC2832099          DOI: 10.1002/pon.1561

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychooncology        ISSN: 1057-9249            Impact factor:   3.894


  12 in total

Review 1.  The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials.

Authors:  D Moher; K F Schulz; D Altman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-04-18       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Does the inclusion of grey literature influence estimates of intervention effectiveness reported in meta-analyses?

Authors:  L McAuley; B Pham; P Tugwell; D Moher
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2000-10-07       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Incorporating data from dissertations in systematic reviews.

Authors:  A J Vickers; C Smith
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 2.188

Review 4.  Grey literature in meta-analyses.

Authors:  Vicki S Conn; Jeffrey C Valentine; Harris M Cooper; Marilyn J Rantz
Journal:  Nurs Res       Date:  2003 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.381

5.  Using dissertations to examine potential bias in child and adolescent clinical trials.

Authors:  Bryce D McLeod; John R Weisz
Journal:  J Consult Clin Psychol       Date:  2004-04

6.  Rating methodological quality: toward improved assessment and investigation.

Authors:  Anne Moyer; John W Finney
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2005 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.622

Review 7.  Systematic review of publication bias in studies on publication bias.

Authors:  Hans-Hermann Dubben; Hans-Peter Beck-Bornholdt
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-06-03

8.  State-of-the-evidence reviews: advantages and challenges of including grey literature.

Authors:  Karen M Benzies; Shahirose Premji; K Alix Hayden; Karen Serrett
Journal:  Worldviews Evid Based Nurs       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 9.  Methodological characteristics and quality of alcohol treatment outcome studies, 1970-98: an expanded evaluation.

Authors:  Anne Moyer; John W Finney; Carolyn E Swearingen
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 6.526

Review 10.  Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions.

Authors:  S Hopewell; S McDonald; M Clarke; M Egger
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2007-04-18
View more
  3 in total

1.  Dissemination of PhD Dissertation Research by Dissertation Format: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Authors:  Arlene Smaldone; Elizabeth Heitkemper; Kasey Jackman; Kyungmi Joanne Woo; Judith Kelson
Journal:  J Nurs Scholarsh       Date:  2019-07-16       Impact factor: 3.176

Review 2.  Effects of after-school programs with at-risk youth on attendance and externalizing behaviors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kristen P Kremer; Brandy R Maynard; Joshua R Polanin; Michael G Vaughn; Christine M Sarteschi
Journal:  J Youth Adolesc       Date:  2014-11-22

Review 3.  Early childhood environmental education: A systematic review of the research literature.

Authors:  Nicole M Ardoin; Alison W Bowers
Journal:  Educ Res Rev       Date:  2020-07-10
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.