Literature DB >> 21567443

Selection models with monotone weight functions in meta analysis.

Kaspar Rufibach1.   

Abstract

Publication bias, the fact that studies identified for inclusion in a meta analysis do not represent all studies on the topic of interest, is commonly recognized as a threat to the validity of a meta analysis. One way to explicitly model publication bias is via weighted probability distributions. We adopt the non-parametric approach initially introduced by Dear and Begg (1992) but impose that the weight function w is monotonely non-increasing as a function of the p-value. Since in meta analysis one typically only has few studies or "observations," regularization of the estimation problem seems sensible. In addition, virtually all parametric weight functions proposed so far in the literature are in fact decreasing. We discuss how to estimate a decreasing weight function in the above model and illustrate the new methodology on two well-known examples. Some basic properties of the log-likelihood function and computation of a p-value quantifying the evidence against the null hypothesis of a constant weight function are indicated. In addition, we provide an approximate selection bias adjusted profile likelihood confidence interval for the treatment effect. The corresponding software and the data sets used to illustrate it are provided as the R package selectMeta (Rufibach, 2011).
Copyright © 2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21567443     DOI: 10.1002/bimj.201000240

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biom J        ISSN: 0323-3847            Impact factor:   2.207


  5 in total

1.  A fully Bayesian application of the Copas selection model for publication bias extended to network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Dimitris Mavridis; Alex Sutton; Andrea Cipriani; Georgia Salanti
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2012-07-17       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Adjustment for reporting bias in network meta-analysis of antidepressant trials.

Authors:  Ludovic Trinquart; Gilles Chatellier; Philippe Ravaud
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-09-27       Impact factor: 4.615

3.  How does under-reporting of negative and inconclusive results affect the false-positive rate in meta-analysis? A simulation study.

Authors:  Michal Kicinski
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-08-28       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  Publication bias in recent meta-analyses.

Authors:  Michal Kicinski
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Selection bias, vote counting, and money-priming effects: A comment on Rohrer, Pashler, and Harris (2015) and Vohs (2015).

Authors:  Miguel A Vadillo; Tom E Hardwicke; David R Shanks
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2016-05
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.