Accid Anal Prev. 2013 Nov;60:245-53. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2012.12.003.
This paper is a corrigendum to the previously published paper: “Publication bias and time-trend bias in meta-analysis of bicycle helmet efficacy: A re-analysis of Attewell, Glase and McFadden, 2001” [Accid. Anal. Prev. (2011) 1245–1251]. This corrigendum was prepared to correct errors in data and analysis in the previously published paper. Like the previously published paper, this paper confirms that the meta-analysis of bicycle helmet efficacy reported by Attewell, Glase and McFadden (Accident Analysis and Prevention, 2001, 345–352) was influenced by publication bias and time-trend bias that was not controlled for. As a result, the analysis reported inflated estimates of the effects of bicycle helmets. This paper presents a re-analysis of the study. The re-analysis included: (1) Ensuring the inclusion of all published studies by means of continuity corrections of estimates of effect relying on zero counts; (2) detecting and adjusting for publication bias by means of the trim-and-fill method; (3) detecting and trying to account for a time-trend bias in estimates of the effects of bicycle helmets; (4) updating the study by including recently published studies evaluating the effects of bicycle helmets. The re-analysis shows smaller safety benefits associated with the use of bicycle helmets than the original study.
“自行车头盔功效荟萃分析中的发表偏倚和时间趋势偏倚:对 Attewell、Glase 和 McFadden,2001 年的再分析”[Accid. Anal. Prev.(2011)1245-1251]。这份勘误是为了纠正先前发表的论文中数据和分析的错误而准备的。与先前发表的论文一样,本文证实 Attewell、Glase 和 McFadden(Accident Analysis and Prevention,2001,345-352)报告的自行车头盔功效荟萃分析受到未控制的发表偏倚和时间趋势偏倚的影响。因此,报告的分析结果夸大了自行车头盔的效果。本文对该研究进行了重新分析。重新分析包括:(1)通过连续校正依赖于零计数的效应估计值,确保纳入所有已发表的研究;(2)通过修剪和填充方法检测和调整发表偏倚;(3)检测并试图解释自行车头盔效果估计中的时间趋势偏倚;(4)通过纳入最近发表的评估自行车头盔效果的研究来更新研究。重新分析显示,与原始研究相比,使用自行车头盔带来的安全效益较小。