We study selection bias in meta-analyses by assuming the presence of researchers (meta-analysts) who intentionally or unintentionally cherry-pick a subset of studies by defining arbitrary inclusion and/or exclusion criteria that will lead to their desired results. When the number of studies is sufficiently large, we theoretically show that a meta-analysts might falsely obtain (non)significant overall treatment effects, regardless of the actual effectiveness of a treatment. We analyze all theoretical findings based on extensive simulation experiments and practical clinical examples. Numerical evaluations demonstrate that the standard method for meta-analyses has the potential to be cherry-picked.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10138056 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/e25040691 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!