ROB-ME: a tool for assessing risk of bias due to missing evidence in systematic reviews with meta-analysis

A key feature of systematic reviews of quantitative research is the attempt to identify all studies that meet the review inclusion criteria and to include relevant data from all such studies in meta-analyses. This goal is compromised when reporting of primary studies is influenced by the P value, magnitude, or direction of study results.1 These factors might influence whether a study is published at all (selective non-publication of studies or publication bias),23 the speed at which a study report is published (time lag bias),4 or type of journal (indexed or not) in which a study report is published (location bias),5 each of which can lead to studies missing from meta-analyses. The P value, magnitude, or direction of the study results might also influence whether, or how completely, particular results are reported (selective non-reporting of study results or outcome reporting bias),6 leading to results missing from meta-analyses even when the study…
Read Original Article: ROB-ME: a tool for assessing risk of bias due to missing evidence in systematic reviews with meta-analysis »