Discover Community Create You

Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Article

A modified regression method to test publication bias in meta-analyses with binary outcomes.

BMC medical research methodology - 17 Dec 2014

Jin Zhi-Chao, Wu Cheng, Zhou Xiao-Hua, He Jia

Abstract excerpt

BACKGROUND: The tendency towards publication bias is greater for observational studies than for randomized clinical trials. Several statistical methods have been developed to test the publication bias. However, almost all existing methods exhibit rather low power or have inappropriate type I error rates. METHODS: We propose a modified regression method, which used a smoothed variance to estimate the precision of...

Read the complete abstract on PubMed

Topics

Share this publication in a Topic to start or enrich a Post.

Share to Meta-Analysis as Topic
Share to Observational Studies as Topic

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Share to Pre-Eclampsia

Share to Pregnancy

Share to Pregnancy Complications, Cardiovascular

Share to Publication Bias

Share to Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Share to Regression Analysis

Source

Open in PubMed Open full text

Identifiers

PMID: 25516509
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-14-132
PMCID: PMC4289575

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 6 Sept 2026. Manifest publication-graph-cohort-2026-09-06.1.

Source receipt: pubmed, retrieved 6 Sept 2026.

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Research trail→

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

A modified regression method to test publication bias in meta-analyses with binary outcomes.PMID 25516509Read ↗

Randomized clinical trial quality has improved over time but is still not good enough: an analysis of 176,620 randomized controlled trials published between 1966 and 2018Semantic proximity Read ↗

Meta-analysis With Zero-event Studies: A Comparative Study With Application to COVID-19 DataSemantic proximity Read ↗

Meta-Analytical Approaches to Ordinal Outcome Data in Clinical Interventional Studies: A Scoping Review with Reproducible ResearchSemantic proximity Read ↗

Meta-analysis models relaxing the random effects normality assumption: methodological systematic review and simulation studySemantic proximity Read ↗

Quantitative bias analysis methods for summary level epidemiologic data in the peer-reviewed literature: a systematic reviewSemantic proximity Read ↗

Triangulating Instrumental Variable, confounder adjustment and difference-in-difference methods for comparative effectiveness research in observational dataSemantic proximity Read ↗

Triangulating Instrumental Variable, confounder adjustment and difference-in-difference methods for comparative effectiveness research in observational dataSemantic proximity Read ↗

Onlinemeta: A Web Server for Meta-Analysis Based on Shiny FrameworkSemantic proximity Read ↗

The Risk of Bias in Iranian Randomized Controlled Trials Included in Cochrane ReviewsSemantic proximity Read ↗

The Risk of Bias in Iranian Randomized Controlled Trials Included in Cochrane ReviewsSemantic proximity Read ↗

Meta-analysis of ratios of sample variances.Semantic proximity Read ↗

The Effect of Dichotomization of Skewed Adjustment Covariates in the Analysis of Clinical TrialsSemantic proximity Read ↗

⌁Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.