Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
JAMA. 1993 Jun 2;269(21):2749-53.

Should unpublished data be included in meta-analyses? Current convictions and controversies.

Author information

  • 1Department of Medicine, McMaster University Faculty of Health Sciences, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To identify the extent to which meta-analyses currently include unpublished data and whether editors, meta-analysts, and methodologists believe unpublished material should be included.

DESIGN:

This article describes two related studies: a literature review and a cross-sectional survey. SAMPLE SELECTION: For the literature review, we identified all articles indexed by the key word meta-analysis from January 1989 to February 1991 and determined whether unpublished material had been searched for, obtained, and included in the meta-analyses. For the cross-sectional survey, we surveyed authors of these meta-analyses, authors of articles addressing methodological issues in meta-analysis published during the same period, and editors of journals in which both types of articles were published.

INTERVENTION:

We asked the respondents about their attitudes concerning inclusion of unpublished data and publication of articles from which data had previously been included in a scientific overview.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:

Inclusion of unpublished data and opinions about whether unpublished material should be included in overviews and whether prior inclusion of data in an overview should bear on publication.

RESULTS:

Of 150 meta-analyses, 46 (30.7%) included unpublished data in their primary analysis. Of authors surveyed, 85% responded. Of the meta-analysts and methodologists, 77.7% felt that unpublished material should definitely or probably be included in scientific overviews; this was true of 46.9% of the editors. A total of 86.4% of the meta-analysts and methodologists and 53.2% of the editors felt that inclusion of data in a prior overview should have no bearing on full publication of original research.

CONCLUSION:

While inclusion of unpublished data in scientific overviews remains controversial, most investigators directly involved in meta-analysis believe that unpublished data should not be systematically excluded. The most valid synthesis of available information will result when meta-analysts subject published and unpublished material to the same rigorous methodological evaluation and present results with and without unpublished sources of data.

PMID:
8492400
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Silverchair Information Systems
    Loading ...
    Support Center