Soeken Karen L, Sripusanapan Acharaporn
University of Maryland School of Nursing, Baltimore 21201, USA.
Nurs Res. 2003 Jan-Feb;52(1):57-60. doi: 10.1097/00006199-200301000-00009.
Although publication bias is a concern when using meta-analysis, techniques for assessing for its potential appear to be underused in nursing.
To demonstrate several methods, both graphical and statistical, of assessing for publication bias.
Four methods are described and demonstrated, ranging from the familiar fail-safe N to the trim-and-fill method, using the same contrived data set.
Methods vary in their conclusion about the presence of potential publication bias in the example presented. Some limitations of the methods are noted to assist meta-analysts in determining which to consider using.
Given that publication bias can affect the validity of meta-analytic studies, researchers are encouraged to use more than one method to assess for bias so that clinicians and decision-makers can have the best possible information available.
尽管在使用荟萃分析时,发表偏倚是一个值得关注的问题,但在护理领域,评估其潜在影响的技术似乎未得到充分利用。
展示几种评估发表偏倚的方法,包括图形法和统计法。
描述并演示了四种方法,从常见的失效安全数N到修剪填充法,使用的是同一个虚构数据集。
在所举例子中,各种方法对潜在发表偏倚是否存在的结论各不相同。指出了这些方法的一些局限性,以帮助荟萃分析者确定考虑使用哪种方法。
鉴于发表偏倚会影响荟萃分析研究的有效性,鼓励研究人员使用多种方法来评估偏倚,以便临床医生和决策者能够获得尽可能最佳的信息。