0
ARTICLE |

Should Unpublished Data Be Included in Meta-analyses?  Current Convictions and Controversies

Deborah J. Cook, MD, MSc, FRCPC; Gordon H. Guyatt, MD, MSc, FRCPC; Gerard Ryan, MBBS, FRACP; Joanne Clifton; Lisa Buckingham; Andrew Willan, PhD; William Mcllroy, PhD; Andrew D. Oxman, MD, MSc, FRCPC
JAMA. 1993;269(21):2749-2753. doi:10.1001/jama.1993.03500210049030.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

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  —To identify the extent to which meta-analyses currently include unpublished data and whether editors, meta-analysts, and methodologists believe unpublished material should be included.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identified all articles indexed by the key word meta-analysis from January 1989 to February 1991 and determined whether unpublished material had been searched for, obtained, and included in the meta-analyses.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 metaanalysis 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  —We asked the respondents about their attitudes concerning inclusion of unpublished data and publication of articles from which data had previously been included in a scientific overview.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  —Inclusion of unpublished data and opinions about whether unpublished material should be included in overviews and whether prior inclusion of data in an overview should bear on publication.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  —Of 150 meta-analyses, 46 (30.7%) included unpublished data in their primary analysis.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 Of the meta-analysts and methodologists, 77.7% felt that unpublished material should definitely or probably be included in scientific overviews; this was true of 46.9% of the editors.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  —While inclusion of unpublished data in scientific overviews remains controversial, most investigators directly involved in meta-analysis believe that unpublished data should not be systematically excluded. The most valid synthesis of available information will result when meta-analysts subject published and unpublished material to the same rigorous methodological evaluation and present results with and without unpublished sources of data.(JAMA. 1993;269:2749-2753)

Topics

Sign In to Access Full Content

Don't have Access?

Register and get free email Table of Contents alerts, saved searches, PowerPoint downloads, CME quizzes, and more

Subscribe for full-text access to content from 1998 forward and a host of useful features

Activate your current subscription (AMA members and current subscribers)

Purchase Online Access to this article for 24 hours

Figures

Tables

References

CME
Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Sign In to Access Full Content

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Jobs
brightcove.createExperiences();