2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.03.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

In meta-analyses of proportion studies, funnel plots were found to be an inaccurate method of assessing publication bias

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
403
0
3

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 547 publications
(410 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
2
403
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…We used random-effects meta-analyses of proportions to combine data on the prevalence of the placental pathological lesions in pregnancies complicated by PE 17 . We planned an a-priori sensitivity analysis according to the type of PE, whether the pathologist was blinded or not to the clinical information and whether the cases were gestational age-matched to controls or not.…”
Section: Risk Of Bias Summary Measures and Synthesis Of Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We used random-effects meta-analyses of proportions to combine data on the prevalence of the placental pathological lesions in pregnancies complicated by PE 17 . We planned an a-priori sensitivity analysis according to the type of PE, whether the pathologist was blinded or not to the clinical information and whether the cases were gestational age-matched to controls or not.…”
Section: Risk Of Bias Summary Measures and Synthesis Of Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We used random-effect meta-analyses of proportions to combine data (Hunter et al, 2014;Manzoli et al, 2011). The survival was analyzed according to the intervention received, including conservative management, amnioreduction, and endoscopic laser photocoagulation.…”
Section: Risk Of Bias Summary Measures and Synthesis Of The Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…45 Funnel plots (Supplemental Figs 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14) displaying the outcome rate from individual studies versus their precision (1 per SE) were carried out with an exploratory aim. Tests for funnel plot asymmetry were not used when the 5 by guest on May 12, 2018 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/ Downloaded from total number of publications included for each outcome was <10.…”
Section: Study Selection Data Collection and Data Itemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this case, the power of the tests is too low to distinguish chance from real asymmetry. 45,46 Between-study heterogeneity was explored using the I 2 statistic, which represents the percentage of between-study variation that is due to heterogeneity rather than chance. A value of 0% indicates no observed heterogeneity, whereas I 2 values ≥50% indicate a substantial level of heterogeneity.…”
Section: Study Selection Data Collection and Data Itemsmentioning
confidence: 99%