Literature DB >> 30664834

Graphical augmentations to sample-size-based funnel plot in meta-analysis.

Lifeng Lin1.   

Abstract

Assessing publication bias is a critical procedure in meta-analyses for rating the synthesized overall evidence. Because statistical tests for publication bias are usually not powerful and only give P values that inform either the presence or absence of the bias, examining the asymmetry of funnel plots has been popular to investigate potentially missing studies and the direction of the bias. Most funnel plots present treatment effects against their standard errors, and the contours depicting studies' significance levels have been used in the plots to distinguish publication bias from other factors (such as heterogeneity and subgroup effects) that may cause the plots' asymmetry. However, treatment effects and their standard errors are frequently associated even if no publication bias exists (eg, both variables depend on the four data cells in a 2 × 2 table for the odds ratio), so standard-error-based funnel plots may lead to false positive conclusions when such association may not be negligible. In addition, the missingness of studies may relate to their sample sizes besides P values (which are partly determined by standard errors); studies with more samples are more likely published. Therefore, funnel plots based on sample sizes can be an alternative tool. However, the contours for standard-error-based funnel plots cannot be directly applied to sample-size-based ones. This article introduces contours for sample-size-based funnel plots of various effect sizes, which may help meta-analysts properly interpret such plots' asymmetry. We provide five examples to illustrate the use of the proposed contours.
© 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Keywords:  funnel plot; meta-analysis; publication bias; sample size; standard error

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30664834      PMCID: PMC6642847          DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1340

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Res Synth Methods        ISSN: 1759-2879            Impact factor:   5.273


  51 in total

Review 1.  Publication bias in meta-analysis: its causes and consequences.

Authors:  A Thornton; P Lee
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  Misleading funnel plot for detection of bias in meta-analysis.

Authors:  J L Tang; J L Liu
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  A comparison of methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis.

Authors:  P Macaskill; S D Walter; L Irwig
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2001-02-28       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Publication and related bias in meta-analysis: power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature.

Authors:  J A Sterne; D Gavaghan; M Egger
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis: guidelines on choice of axis.

Authors:  J A Sterne; M Egger
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  Bayesian random effects meta-analysis of trials with binary outcomes: methods for the absolute risk difference and relative risk scales.

Authors:  D E Warn; S G Thompson; D J Spiegelhalter
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2002-06-15       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed.

Authors:  Jonathan J Deeks; Petra Macaskill; Les Irwig
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 8.  Acute renal failure in the intensive care unit: a systematic review of the impact of dialytic modality on mortality and renal recovery.

Authors:  Marcello Tonelli; Braden Manns; David Feller-Kopman
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 8.860

Review 9.  Assisted reproductive technologies and the risk of birth defects--a systematic review.

Authors:  Michèle Hansen; Carol Bower; Elizabeth Milne; Nicholas de Klerk; Jennifer J Kurinczuk
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2004-11-26       Impact factor: 6.918

10.  Why most published research findings are false.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2005-08-30       Impact factor: 11.613

View more
  8 in total

1.  A Bayesian approach to assessing small-study effects in meta-analysis of a binary outcome with controlled false positive rate.

Authors:  Linyu Shi; Haitao Chu; Lifeng Lin
Journal:  Res Synth Methods       Date:  2020-06-17       Impact factor: 5.273

2.  Hybrid test for publication bias in meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lifeng Lin
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 3.021

3.  Low vision rehabilitation in improving the quality of life for patients with impaired vision: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 52 randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Jianhua Liu; Jige Dong; Yaping Chen; Weidong Zhang; Shuai Tong; Jiangzhou Guo
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-05-14       Impact factor: 1.889

4.  Prevalence and outcomes of co-infection and superinfection with SARS-CoV-2 and other pathogens: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jackson S Musuuza; Lauren Watson; Vishala Parmasad; Nathan Putman-Buehler; Leslie Christensen; Nasia Safdar
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-05-06       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Clinical significance of long noncoding RNA MNX1-AS1 in human cancers: a meta-analysis of cohort studies and bioinformatics analysis based on TCGA datasets.

Authors:  Kang Chen; Jian-Xin Gan; Ze-Ping Huang; Jun Liu; Hai-Peng Liu
Journal:  Bioengineered       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 3.269

6.  Effects of Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy on Postoperative Complications in Rectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Jianguo Yang; Yajun Luo; Tingting Tian; Peng Dong; Zhongxue Fu
Journal:  J Oncol       Date:  2022-01-05       Impact factor: 4.375

7.  Risk of Self-harm in Children and Adults With Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ashley Blanchard; Stanford Chihuri; Carolyn G DiGuiseppi; Guohua Li
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2021-10-01

Review 8.  There is no dose-response relationship between the amount of exercise and improvement in HbA1c in interventions over 12 weeks in patients with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis and meta-regression.

Authors:  Elizabeth Wrench; Kate Rattley; Joel E Lambert; Rebecca Killick; Lawrence D Hayes; Robert M Lauder; Christopher J Gaffney
Journal:  Acta Diabetol       Date:  2022-08-05       Impact factor: 4.087

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.