Palma Pérez Silvia, Delgado Rodríguez Miguel
Area de Medicina Preventiva y Salud Pública, Universidad de Jaén, Jaén, España.
Gac Sanit. 2006 Dec;20 Suppl 3:10-6. doi: 10.1157/13101085.
The present review aims to answer 3 questions: does publication bias need to be assessed in meta-analyses?; what procedures, not requiring complex statistical approaches, can be applied to detect it?; and should other factors be taken into account when interpreting the procedures? The first question is easy to answer. Publication bias is a potential threat to the validity of the conclusions of meta-analyses. Therefore, both the MOOSE and QUOROM statements include publication bias in their guidelines; nevertheless, many meta-analyses do not use these statements (e.g., meta-analyses conducted by the Cochrane Collaboration), perhaps because they use a comprehensive search strategy. There are many methods to assess publication bias. The most frequently used are funnel plots or <
本综述旨在回答3个问题:在荟萃分析中是否需要评估发表偏倚?;可以应用哪些不需要复杂统计方法的程序来检测发表偏倚?;在解释这些程序时是否应考虑其他因素?第一个问题很容易回答。发表偏倚是对荟萃分析结论有效性的潜在威胁。因此,MOOSE声明和QUOROM声明在其指南中都包括了发表偏倚;然而,许多荟萃分析并未采用这些声明(例如,Cochrane协作网进行的荟萃分析),可能是因为它们采用了全面的检索策略。有许多方法可用于评估发表偏倚。最常用的是漏斗图或“圣诞树”图、“修剪与填充”法(可估计偏倚的影响)以及基于图上回归的方法,如Egger法和漏斗图回归法。这些方法的一个优点是它们只能使用已发表的数据来应用。然而,这些方法在检测偏倚方面的一致性往往较差。因此,建议应用多种方法来检测发表偏倚。为了正确解释结果,纳入研究的数量应超过10项,并且必须考虑合并估计中异质性的存在。