Cited by 2,955Meta-analysis and systematic reviewsStatistical Methods in Epidemiologyscientometrics and bibliometrics research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Nonparametric “Trim and Fill” Method of Accounting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis

Duval, Sue, Tweedie, Richard·2000·Journal of the American Statistical Association

Abstract

Meta-analysis collects and synthesizes results from individual studies to estimate an overall effect size. If published studies are chosen, say through a literature review, then an inherent selection bias may arise, because, for example, studies may tend to be published more readily if they are statistically significant, or deemed to be more “interesting” in terms of the impact of their outcomes. We develop a simple rank-based data augmentation technique, formalizing the use of funnel plots, to estimate and adjust for the numbers and outcomes of missing studies. Several nonparametric estimators are proposed for the number of missing studies, and their properties are developed analytically and through simulations. We apply the method to simulated and epidemiological datasets and show that it is both effective and consistent with other criteria in the literature.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01621459.2000.10473905

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 40 references

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. 1983, British Medical Journal, 280, 508
  2. Cooper H., 1998, Synthesizing Research
  3. Dear K., 1997, Statistical Science, 12, 245
  4. DuMouchel W., 1997, Statistical Science, 12, 244
  5. Duval S. J., 1999, “Effects of Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis,”
  6. Duval S. J., “Robustness of the ‘Trim and Fill’ publication bias approach to different mechanisms for study suppression,”
  7. Eberly L. E., 1999, Journal of Official Statistics, 15
  8. Hedges L., 1985, Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis
  9. Sugita M., 1994, Tokai Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, 19, 29
  10. Sutton A. J., 1999, “The Impact of Publication Bias on Meta-Analyses Within the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews,”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 801–900 of 1,059

Metadata

Authors
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R.
Affiliations
  • Colorado State University (US)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
Venue
Journal of the American Statistical Association
Published
2000-03
Volume
95
Issue
449
Pages
89-98
ISSN
  • 0162-1459 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-274X
OpenAlex
W2043565183
Cited by
2,955
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 106 · 2025: 167 · 2024: 189 · 2023: 171 · 2022: 233 · 2021: 275 · 2020: 259 · 2019: 179 · 2018: 184 · 2017: 160 · 2016: 142 · 2015: 149 · 2014: 128 · 2013: 91 · 2012: 101
FWCI
21.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of the American Statistical Association (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
Keywords
publication bias, trim and fill, missing studies, funnel plot, nonparametric estimators, selection bias, meta-analysis, effect size estimation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review