Reporting trends of p values in the neurosurgical literature

To, Minh‐Son; Jukes, Alistair

doi:10.3171/2018.8.jns172897

Cited by 8 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies have also demonstrated the presence of publication bias in the neurosurgical literature. 4,7 One of the studies, restricted to 16 studies that considered the surgical treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms, concluded that failure to publish is not a random event. 4 They noticed that “neurosurgeons have very limited motivation to publish their results unless their combined mortality and morbidity is less than 10%.” This indicated that there is preferential publication of papers, where studies with positive clinical outcomes are more likely to be published than those that do not.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Analysis of Publication Bias in Neurosurgery Meta-Analyses

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND:Statistically significant positive results are more likely to be published than negative or insignificant outcomes. This phenomenon, also termed publication bias, can skew the interpretation of meta-analyses. The widespread presence of publication bias in the biomedical literature has led to the development of various statistical approaches, such as the visual inspection of funnel plots, Begg test, and Egger test, to assess and account for it.OBJECTIVE:To determine how well publication bias is assessed for in meta-analyses of the neurosurgical literature.METHODS:A systematic search for meta-analyses from the top neurosurgery journals was conducted. Data relevant to the presence, assessment, and adjustments for publication bias were extracted.RESULTS:The search yielded 190 articles. Most of the articles (n = 108, 56.8%) were assessed for publication bias, of which 40 (37.0%) found evidence for publication bias whereas 61 (56.5%) did not. In the former case, only 11 (27.5%) made corrections for the bias using the trim-and-fill method, whereas 29 (72.5%) made no correction. Thus, 111 meta-analyses (58.4%) either did not assess for publication bias or, if assessed to be present, did not adjust for it.CONCLUSION:Taken together, these results indicate that publication bias remains largely unaccounted for in neurosurgical meta-analyses.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Analysis of Publication Bias in Neurosurgery Meta-Analyses

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Importantly, the dichotomization of P values and emphasis on “statistical significance” has demonstrable effects on the reporting of results in the biomedical literature. Many studies have shown not only a positive skew in the distribution of reported P values but also a large step-change in the P value distribution at 0.05 [ 30 – 33 ]. Such presence of systematic bias in the literature is likely to have far-reaching consequences[ 21 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The weakness of fragility index exposed in an analysis of the traumatic brain injury management guidelines: A meta-epidemiological and simulation study

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To perform fragility index (FI) analysis on the evidence that forms the basis of the guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), and develop a deeper understanding of the pitfalls associated with FI. Design Meta-epidemiological analysis and numerical simulations. Methods The Brain Trauma Foundation guidelines (4 th edition) for management of severe TBI were used to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). FI based on Fisher's exact test and relative risk was performed on eligible RCTs. The relationship between FI, event counts and P values was explored by exhaustively considering different combinations of outcomes for studies of total size ranging from 80 to 10000. Sample size calculations were also performed for a range of power, baseline risk and relative risk, to determine the influence of study design on FI. Results FI analysis of the severe TBI management guidelines revealed that most studies were associated with a low FI. In the majority of studies, FI was of a similar magnitude to the number lost to follow-up. The simulations revealed that while FI was inversely related to P value, a wide range of FI may be associated with a given P value. FI is also affected by sample size, baseline risk and effect size. Sample size calculations suggest that aside from very high-PLOS ONE

show abstract

“…Publication bias and selective reporting are a known issue in biomedical research [100], and neurosurgical research is not immune to this [101]. Fewer than half of U.S. clinical trials have complied with the law on reporting results [102].…”

Section: Case Registries Obligation To Publish and Long-term Follow-u...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Concerns About Psychiatric Neurosurgery and How They Can Be Overcome: Recommendations for Responsible Research

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Psychiatric neurosurgery is experiencing a revival. Beside deep brain stimulation (DBS), several ablative neurosurgical procedures are currently in use. Each approach has a different profile of advantages and disadvantages. However, many psychiatrists, ethicists, and laypeople are sceptical about psychiatric neurosurgery. Methods We identify the main concerns against psychiatric neurosurgery, and discuss the extent to which they are justified and how they might be overcome. We review the evidence for the effectiveness, efficacy and safety of each approach, and discuss how this could be improved. We analyse whether and, if so, how randomised controlled trials (RCTs) can be used in the different approaches, and what alternatives are available if conducting RCTs is impossible for practical or ethical reasons. Specifically, we analyse the problem of failed RCTs after promising open-label studies. Results The main concerns are: (i) reservations based on historical psychosurgery, (ii) concerns about personality changes, (iii) concerns regarding localised interventions, and (iv) scepticism due to the lack of scientific evidence. Given the need for effective therapies for treatment-refractory psychiatric disorders and preliminary evidence for the effectiveness of psychiatric neurosurgery, further research is warranted and necessary. Since psychiatric neurosurgery has the potential to modify personality traits, it should be held to the highest ethical and scientific standards. Conclusions Psychiatric neurosurgery procedures with preliminary evidence for efficacy and an acceptable risk–benefit profile include DBS and micro- or radiosurgical anterior capsulotomy for intractable obsessive–compulsive disorder. These methods may be considered for individual treatment attempts, but multi-centre RCTs are necessary to provide reliable evidence.

show abstract

Reporting trends of p values in the neurosurgical literature

Cited by 8 publications

References 40 publications

Systematic Analysis of Publication Bias in Neurosurgery Meta-Analyses

Systematic Analysis of Publication Bias in Neurosurgery Meta-Analyses

The weakness of fragility index exposed in an analysis of the traumatic brain injury management guidelines: A meta-epidemiological and simulation study

Concerns About Psychiatric Neurosurgery and How They Can Be Overcome: Recommendations for Responsible Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About