The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The appropriateness of asymmetry tests for publication bias in meta-analyses: a large survey
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Statistical tests for funnel-plot asymmetry are common in meta-analyses. Inappropriate application can generate misleading inferences about publication bias. We aimed to measure, in a survey of meta-analyses, how frequently the application of these tests would be not meaningful or inappropriate. METHODS: We evaluated all meta-analyses of binary outcomes with é 3 studies in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2003, issue 2). A separate, restricted analysis was confined to the largest meta-analysis in each of the review articles. In each meta-analysis, we assessed whether criteria to apply asymmetry tests were met: no significant heterogeneity, I2 < 50%, é 10 studies (with statistically significant results in at least 1) and ratio of the maximal to minimal variance across studies > 4. We performed a correlation and 2 regression asymmetry tests and evaluated their concordance. Finally, we sampled 60 meta-analyses from print journals in 2005 that cited use of the standard regression test. RESULTS: A total of 366 of 6873 (5%) and 98 of 846 meta-analyses (12%) in the wider and restricted Cochrane data set, respectively, would have qualified for use of asymmetry tests. Asymmetry test results were significant in 7%-18% of the meta-analyses. Concordance between the 3 tests was modest (estimated k 0.33-0.66). Of the 60 journal meta-analyses, 7 (12%) would qualify for asymmetry tests; all 11 claims for identification of publication bias were made in the face of large and significant heterogeneity. INTERPRETATION: Statistical conditions for employing asymmetry tests for publication bias are absent from most meta-analyses; yet, in medical journals these tests are performed often and interpreted erroneously.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, publication bias tests might be problematic for IN-OT studies due to small sample sizes resulting in insufficient statistical power and sample size variability for the tests to yield reliable and significant results (26).”
From Statistical and Methodological Considerations for the Interpretation of Intranasal Oxytocin Studies (2016) · cites this paper as [26]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“The small number of studies and presence of significant heterogeneity precluded formal testing for publication bias[35].”
From Daily Sitting Time and All-Cause Mortality: A Meta-Analysis (2013) · cites this paper as [35]
In the citing paper
“Of 60 meta-analyses in 24 articles published in 2005 in which formal assessments were reported, most were based on fewer than ten studies; most displayed statistically significant heterogeneity; and many reviewers misinterpreted the results of the tests employed [123].”
From The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009) · cites this paper as [123]
In the citing paper
“Although evidence that smaller studies had larger estimated effects than large ones may suggest the possibility that the available evidence is biased, misinterpretation of such data is common [123].”
From The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009) · cites this paper as [123]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales
Cohen, J. (1960) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/001316446002000104 · Cited by 42,398
Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis
Higgins, J. P. T., & Thompson, S. G. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1186 · Cited by 36,763
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Cochrane Book Series
(2008) · doi:10.1002/9780470712184 · Cited by 25,048
Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias
Begg, C. B., & Mazumdar, M. (1994) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533446 · Cited by 16,955
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 · Cited by 10,505
Self-citationCochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions
Tarsilla, M. (2010) · Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation · doi:10.56645/jmde.v6i14.284 · Cited by 5,232
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · CHANCE · doi:10.1080/09332480.2005.10722754 · Cited by 4,702
Self-citationFunnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis
Sterne, J. A. C., & Egger, M. (2001) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(01)00377-8 · Cited by 3,779
Publication bias in clinical research
Easterbrook, P. J., Gopalan, R., Berlin, J. A., & Matthews, D. R. (1991) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/0140-6736(91)90201-y · Cited by 3,109
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 901–1,000 of 1,000
A Brief History of Meta-analysis
Higgins, S. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781139519618.002 · Cited by 2
Impacts Of Extensive Reading on English Vocabulary Learning: A Meta-Analysis
Hakim, M. F. F. (2021) · IJET (Indonesian Journal of English Teaching) · doi:10.15642/ijet2.2021.10.2.169-189 · Cited by 1
Yeh, T., Liang, C., Tsai, C., Solmi, M., Lafer, B., Tseng, P., Hsu, C., Lin, P., Firth, J., Stubbs, B., et al. (2022) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph19031681 · Cited by 1
“005) in the published literature are different from the expected number of studies with statistically significant results [33].”
ResultAguiar, P. M. (2014) · Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (Universidade de São Paulo) · doi:10.11606/t.9.2014.tde-11122014-153048 · Cited by 1
A series of meta-analytic tests of the depletion effect
Carter, E. C. (2013) · Cited by 1
Viner, G., & Parush, A. (2008) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.1080036 · Cited by 1
Influence of Chinese eye exercises on myopia control in an East Asian population: a meta-analysisPreprint
Sangvatanakul, P., Tangthianchaichana, J., Tasanarong, A., Pabalan, N., & Tharabenjasin, P. (2019) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/19011270 · Cited by 1
“Publication bias was considered 241 for assessment if the comparisons met two conditions: (i) ≥ 10 studies only [46] and (ii) significant 242 outcomes.”
MethodHeterogeneity of research results: New perspectives on psychological science
Linden, A. H. (2019) · Northumbria Research Link (Northumbria University) · Cited by 1
Cambio climático y declive de anfibios
Bosch, J. (2005) · Foresta · Cited by 1
Single dose tramadol for acute postoperative pain in adults
Sudo, E. C., Watanabe, L. M., & Saconato, H. (2010) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd008660 · Cited by 1
Bailey, M. (2019) · Pain · doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001463 · Cited by 1
Yau, K.-C., Revill, G., Blackman, G., Shaikh, M., & Bell, V. (2023) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2023.02.17.23286118 · Cited by 1
“Egger’s test was completed (p = 0.052) although was likely under-powered given 10 studies are considered the minimum for a reliable assessment of publication bias (Ioannidis & Trikalinos, 2007).”
MethodInfluentialEditor's Message: “AI”: No Guarantee of Accuracy or Integrity
(2023) · Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy · doi:10.1519/jpt.0000000000000389 · Cited by 1
“…started with high quality and was down-graded for each of the following issues: (1) publication bias (at least 10 studies, Egger test P value < .05) 70 ; (2) imprecision when fewer than 400 participants were included in the meta-analysis 71 ; (3) when more than 25% of the studies had a high risk…”
BackgroundHeady, N., Watkins, A. J., John, A. M., & Hutchings, H. A. (2023) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3344908/v1 · Cited by 1
Kanukula, R., Page, M. J., Turner, S., & McKenzie, J. E. (2023) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4621570 · Cited by 1
Tatsioni, A., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2024) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-323-99967-0.00212-x · Cited by 1
Self-citationLother, S., Tennenhouse, L. G., Rabbani, R., Abou-Setta, A. M., Askin, N., Turgeon, A. F., Murthy, S., Houston, B. L., Houston, D. S., Mendelson, A. A., et al. (2024) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2024.04.16.24305938 · Cited by 1
Fernandes, D., Lynch, J. G., & Kim, L. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5385386 · Cited by 1
Vitamin C for treating atrial fibrillation
Hemilä, H., & Suonsyrjä, T. (2016) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd011471.pub2
Crowther, M., Vickers, M. A., & Avenell, A. (2009) · Blood · doi:10.1182/blood-2009-03-211169
Abdallah, D. Y., Jadaan, M. M., & McCabe, J. P. (2013) · European Spine Journal · doi:10.1007/s00586-013-3001-4
“Between 50 and 75 % of meta-analyses contain \10 studies, including Cochrane reviews [4, 5].”
BackgroundMethodThird-line systemic treatment for non-small cell lung cancer
Kim, S. C. H., Paget‐Bailly, S., Trinquart, L., Calais, F., Bonnetain, F., & Westeel, V. (2014) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd011291
Maintenance therapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)
Paget‐Bailly, S., Paulus, V., Pana-Katatali, H., Agazzi, G. M., Trinquart, L., Calais, F., & Westeel, V. (2015) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd011631
RetractedCheng, S., Pang, B., Gu, C., Sun, S., An, C., Zhang, Z., Li, J., & Liu, G.-J. (2017) · Frontiers in Laboratory Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.flm.2017.10.002
Solo, K. (2017) · Scholarship@Western (Western University)
daycare-systematic-review-preprintPreprint
Harper, S. B. (2017) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/xm8g6
Topical treatments for eczema: a network meta-analysis
Yew, Y. W., Zheng, Q., Kok, W. L., Ho, M. S. L., Teoh, J. Y., Wong, Y., Shi, L., & Chan, E. S. (2021) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd013205.pub2
Simons, M., Scott‐Sheldon, L. A. J., Ludvigsson, J. F., & Green, P. H. R. (2018) · The American Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2017.12.004
Pabalan, N., Tharabenjasin, P., Parcharoen, Y., & Tasanarong, A. (2019) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/19002949
Fundamentals of Cancer Epidemiology
Gapstur, S. M., & Jacobs, E. J. (2017) · doi:10.1002/9781119468868.ch2
Vitamin C for treating atrial fibrillation
Hemilä, H., & Suonsyrjä, T. (2015) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd011471
RetractedMazuquin, B. (2019) · CLOK (University of Central Lancashire)
Goshtasbi, K., Abiri, A., Kuan, E. C., & Cadena, G. (2020) · World Neurosurgery · doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2019.11.095
Conclusions and Final Reflections
Higgins, S. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781139519618.008
(2020) · Journal of Biochemical and Molecular Toxicology · doi:10.1002/jbt.22585
RetractedHiggins, S. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781139519618.003
Notas sobre el Régimen Jurídico de los Equipamientos
Murgadas, E. A. I. (1983) · Revista de derecho urbanístico y medio ambiente/Revista de derecho urbanístico y medio ambiente
Higgins, S. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781139519618.001
Estimation of Hepatitis C Prognosis to Inform Treatment Prioritization Decisions
Erman, A. (2020) · TSpace (University of Toronto)
Higgins, S. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781139519618.005
Association between PD-L1 expression and head and neck cancer prognosis: a meta-analysisPreprint
Shen, Z., Wu, L., Cai, X., Ye, D., & Zhao, G. (2019) · doi:10.21203/rs.2.12808/v1
Kim, J. C., Kim, J., Jung, J., Kim, C. W., Yoon, Y. S., & Park, I. J. (2021) · International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery · doi:10.1002/rcs.2348
“results of previous trials, have increased statistical power, these meta‐analyses also have several biases, including the drawer effect or researcher‐associated inflated effect size, while minimising the heterogeneity of included studies.(11) The present study was designed to evaluate the validity of robot‐assisted cu…”
MethodLa encuadernación en París en las avanzadas del arte moderno
Turmo, E. B. (2003) · Dialnet (Universidad de la Rioja)
Zhu, Y., & Qiao, M. (2021) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1202475/v1
Gillies-Podgorecki, J., van Gaalen, S., Abdulwahid, T., Becker, M., Lê, M., Rabbani, R., Zarychanski, R., & Abou-Setta, A. M. (2021) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-137728/v1
(2021) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781119558378.ref
Coleman, P. K. (2012) · The British Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1192/bjp.200.1.79
Single dose tramadol for acute postoperative pain in adults
Sudo, E. C., Watanabe, L. M., & Saconato, H. (2013) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd008660.pub2
Tiongco, R. E., Cayabyab, I., Clemente, B., Flake, C. C., Dizon, D., Mallari, J. K., & Pineda-Cortel, M. R. (2022) · Gene Reports · doi:10.1016/j.genrep.2022.101626
Higgins, S. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781139519618.011
Unpicking the Evidence about Parental Involvement and Engagement
Higgins, S. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781139519618.007
Higgins, S. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781139519618.010
Higgins, S. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781139519618.006
Higgins, S. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781139519618.012
Higgins, S. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781139519618.013
Details of the Meta-analyses Included
Higgins, S. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781139519618.009
Moreel, L., Betrains, A., Molenberghs, G., Vanderschueren, S., & Blockmans, D. (2023) · Revue du Rhumatisme · doi:10.1016/j.rhum.2023.02.013
Köster, W., & Scheffer, C. (2023) · Der Merkurstab · doi:10.14271/dms-21613-de
Mattschey, J. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-34681-1_6
Hossein‐Zadeh, N. G. (2023) · Journal of Dairy Research · doi:10.1017/s0022029923000444
“When heterogeneity (Q test, P 0.10) was detected for the parameters analysed, testing for the occurrence of possible publication bias is not appropriate because it may lead to false-positive claims (Ioannidis and Trikalinos, 2007).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialIs Enemy Release Strong for Invasive Plants?Preprint
STILING, P. D., & Lajeunesse, M. J. (2023) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3216417/v1
Salomon, S., Grubmüller, E., Kropf, P., Nickl, E., Rühl, A., Weigel, S., Becker, F., Vital, A. L. A., Schott, M., & Mair, M. M. (2023) · doi:10.32942/x22p6d
Brown, M., & Sacco, D. F. (2024) · Politics and the Life Sciences · doi:10.1017/pls.2023.28
Essouma, M., Nkeck, J. R., & Noubiap, J. J. (2024) · Reumatología Clínica (English Edition) · doi:10.1016/j.reumae.2023.10.005
Dowling, G. P., Daly, G. R., Hegarty, A., Hembrecht, S., Bracken, A., Toomey, S., Hennessy, B. T., & Hill, A. D. K. (2024) · British journal of surgery · doi:10.1093/bjs/znae190
Helland, O. B., Andreassen, L. V., Fischer, A. S., & Gudbrandsen, O. A. (2024) · Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition · doi:10.1111/jpn.14045
“(Ioannidis and Trikalinos 2007), as is the case for the present meta ‐ analysis with a considerable heterogeneity I 2 of 78%.”
Chang, L., Yang, Y., Liu, Z., Peng, T., Wang, C., Wu, H., & Gou, S. (2024) · Journal of Pancreatology · doi:10.1097/jp9.0000000000000194
Xu, J., Kang, J., Schilling, J. K., Paganini‐Hill, A., Ericson, M., Kim, J. K., & Fisher, M. (2025) · Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases · doi:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2025.108384
Deng, Y., Wang, M., Li, C., & Wu, H. Y. (2025) · European Geriatric Medicine · doi:10.1007/s41999-025-01257-1
“Additionally, funnel plots were generated to visually evaluate potential publication bias when an adequate number of studies (typically more than 10) were available [41].”
Wasti, S. A., Wasti, A., Waheed, M. W. B., & Naveed, H. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5356673
Rudroff, T. (2025) · NeuroSci · doi:10.3390/neurosci6030080
“Failure to replicate would suggest spurious associations or context-specific artifacts rather than generalizable biological relationships [134,135].”
Cardellat‐González, M., González‐Gómez, L., Guzmán-Gómez, J.-D., Blanco-Heras, L., Arana-Rodríguez, A., & Rodríguez‐Domínguez, Á. (2025) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare13172209
“Publication bias was assessed in cases where the meta-analysis included more than 10 studies [32].”
InfluentialRocha, I. C. O., Valença, A. M., Coutinho, E. S. F., Banhara, P. B., & Berger, W. L. (2025) · Trauma Violence & Abuse · doi:10.1177/15248380251386799
Fernandes, D., Lynch, J. G., & Kim, L. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5772062
Tiongco, R. E., Calma, I. S., Gozum, C. C., Manao, M. A., Ayson, F. L., Basilio, P. V., Malig, A. K., Miranda, S., Castro, E. J., & Dominguez, M. J. (2025) · Journal of Diabetes & Metabolic Disorders · doi:10.1007/s40200-025-01808-0
Mongkolrob, R., Tharabenjasin, P., Bualuang, A., & Pabalan, N. (2019) · doi:10.21203/rs.2.18129/v1
“Less than this number presents low sensitivity of the publication bias tests [25].”
BackgroundDelara, M., Murray, L., Jafari, B., Bahji, A., Goodarzi, Z., Kirkham, J. G., Chowdhury, Z., & Seitz, D. P. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20342253
Delara, M., Murray, L., Jafari, B., Bahji, A., Goodarzi, Z., Kirkham, J. G., Chowdhury, Z., & Seitz, D. P. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20342268
Janiaud, P., Agarwal, A., Tzoulaki, I., Theodoratou, E., Tsilidis, K. K., Evangelou, E., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14913276
Self-citationFazelian, S., Moradi, F., Agah, S., Hoseini, A., Heydari, H., Morvaridzadeh, M., Omidi, A., Pizarro, A. B., Ghafouri, A., & Heshmati, J. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14526342
Delara, M., Murray, L., Jafari, B., Bahji, A., Goodarzi, Z., Kirkham, J. G., Chowdhury, Z., & Seitz, D. P. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20342277
Delara, M., Murray, L., Jafari, B., Bahji, A., Goodarzi, Z., Kirkham, J. G., Chowdhury, Z., & Seitz, D. P. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20342265
Ward, M. M., Madanchi, N., Yazdanyar, A. R., Shah, N. R., & Constantinescu, F. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.26642611
Fazelian, S., Moradi, F., Agah, S., Hoseini, A., Heydari, H., Morvaridzadeh, M., Omidi, A., Pizarro, A. B., Ghafouri, A., & Heshmati, J. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14526345
Fazelian, S., Moradi, F., Agah, S., Hoseini, A., Heydari, H., Morvaridzadeh, M., Omidi, A., Pizarro, A. B., Ghafouri, A., & Heshmati, J. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14526348
Edessa, D., Assefa, N., Dessie, Y., Asefa, F., Dinsa, G., & Oljira, L. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.21256636
Delara, M., Murray, L., Jafari, B., Bahji, A., Goodarzi, Z., Kirkham, J. G., Chowdhury, Z., & Seitz, D. P. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20342256
Delara, M., Murray, L., Jafari, B., Bahji, A., Goodarzi, Z., Kirkham, J. G., Chowdhury, Z., & Seitz, D. P. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20342280
Janiaud, P., Agarwal, A., Tzoulaki, I., Theodoratou, E., Tsilidis, K. K., Evangelou, E., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14913270
Self-citationKunjantarachot, A., Pabalan, N., Jarjanazi, H., Christofolini, D. M., Montagna, E., Barbosa, C. P., & Bianco, B. (2020) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.13269864
Janiaud, P., Agarwal, A., Tzoulaki, I., Theodoratou, E., Tsilidis, K. K., Evangelou, E., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14913273
Self-citationJaniaud, P., Agarwal, A., Tzoulaki, I., Theodoratou, E., Tsilidis, K. K., Evangelou, E., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14913282
Self-citationDelara, M., Murray, L., Jafari, B., Bahji, A., Goodarzi, Z., Kirkham, J. G., Chowdhury, Z., & Seitz, D. P. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20342271
Metadata
- Authors
- Ioannidis, J. P. A., & Trikalinos, T. A.
- Affiliations
- Tufts University (US)
- Venue
- Canadian Medical Association Journal
- Publisher
- CMA Joule Inc.
- Published
- 2007-04-10
- Volume
- 176
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1091-1096
- ISSN
- 0820-3946 (ISSN-L)
- 1488-2329
- PMC
- PMC1839799
- OpenAlex
- W2164093802
- Cited by
- 1,052
- References
- 40
- Citations by year
- 2026: 49 · 2025: 48 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 81 · 2021: 73 · 2020: 83 · 2019: 81 · 2018: 73 · 2017: 55 · 2016: 62 · 2015: 64 · 2014: 68 · 2013: 38 · 2012: 39
- FWCI
- 31.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Canadian Medical Association Journal (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (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, funnel plot asymmetry, meta-analysis, heterogeneity, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, binary outcomes, test concordance
- MeSH terms
- Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Periodicals as Topic, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Databases, Bibliographic, Publication Bias
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
