Potential impact of missing outcome data on treatment effects in systematic reviews: imputation study.

Objective: To assess the risk of bias associated with missing outcome data in systematic reviews.

Design: Imputation study.

Setting: Systematic reviews.

Meta-Analyses Proved Inconsistent in How Missing Data Were Handled Across Their Included Primary Trials: A Methodological Survey.

Background: How systematic review authors address missing data among eligible primary studies remains uncertain.

Objective: To assess whether systematic review authors are consistent in the way they handle missing data, both across trials included in the same meta-analysis, and with their reported methods.

Methods: We first identified 100 eligible systematic reviews that included a statistically significant meta-analysis of a patient-important dichotomous efficacy outcome.

Access to care and outcomes for neuroendocrine tumours: does socioeconomic status matter?

Introduction: Neuroendocrine tumours (nets) are a poorly understood malignancy lacking standardized care. Differences in socioeconomic status (ses) might worsen the effect of non-standardized care. We examined the effect of ses on net peri-diagnostic care patterns and outcomes.

Potentially missing data are considerably more frequent than definitely missing data: a methodological survey of 638 randomized controlled trials.

Background And Objective: Missing data for the outcomes of participants in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are a key element of risk of bias assessment. However, it is not always clear from RCT reports whether some categories of participants were followed-up or not (i.e.