These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22193659)
61. Cross-hairs: a scatterplot for meta-analysis in R. Brannick MT; Gültaş M Res Synth Methods; 2017 Mar; 8(1):53-63. PubMed ID: 27496610 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
63. Systematic reviews in health care: Investigating and dealing with publication and other biases in meta-analysis. Sterne JA; Egger M; Smith GD BMJ; 2001 Jul; 323(7304):101-5. PubMed ID: 11451790 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
64. Comment on a review of methods to assess publication and other reporting biases in meta-analysis. Furuya-Kanamori L; Lin L; Doi SAR Res Synth Methods; 2022 Jul; 13(4):390-391. PubMed ID: 35118805 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
65. The true meaning of DICE: don't ignore chance effects. Clarke M J R Soc Med; 2021 Dec; 114(12):575-577. PubMed ID: 34935558 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
66. Publication bias and meta analysis. Schork MA J Hypertens; 2003 Feb; 21(2):243-5. PubMed ID: 12569246 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
67. Publication Bias: The Elephant in the Review. Dalton JE; Bolen SD; Mascha EJ Anesth Analg; 2016 Oct; 123(4):812-3. PubMed ID: 27636569 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
68. The extent and consequences of p-hacking in science. Head ML; Holman L; Lanfear R; Kahn AT; Jennions MD PLoS Biol; 2015 Mar; 13(3):e1002106. PubMed ID: 25768323 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
69. How to read a funnel plot in a meta-analysis. Sedgwick P; Marston L BMJ; 2015 Sep; 351():h4718. PubMed ID: 26377337 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
70. Author's response to suggestion of publication bias in a recent meta-analysis on breastfeeding and intelligence quotient. Horta BL; Victora CG Acta Paediatr; 2017 Feb; 106(2):346. PubMed ID: 27862292 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
71. Capsule Commentary on Lin et. al. Empirical Comparison of Publication Bias Tests in Meta-analysis. Kuriyama A J Gen Intern Med; 2018 Aug; 33(8):1382. PubMed ID: 29948811 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
72. Bias in location and selection of studies. Egger M; Smith GD BMJ; 1998 Jan; 316(7124):61-6. PubMed ID: 9451274 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
76. Misleading meta-analysis. "Fail safe N" is a useful mathematical measure of the stability of results. Persaud R BMJ; 1996 Jan; 312(7023):125. PubMed ID: 8555918 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
77. Statistics Commentary Series: Commentary No. 19: Meta-Analysis, Part 2 - Some of the Issues. Streiner DL J Clin Psychopharmacol; 2017 Apr; 37(2):123-124. PubMed ID: 28225744 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
78. Introduction to the Special Section on Moving Toward a Cumulative Science: Maximizing What Our Research Can Tell Us. Ledgerwood A Perspect Psychol Sci; 2014 Nov; 9(6):610-1. PubMed ID: 26186111 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
79. Rendering the Doi plot properly in meta-analysis. Doi SA Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2018 Dec; 16(4):242-243. PubMed ID: 30507720 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
80. Misleading meta-analysis. Subject to many potential biases. Gilbody S; House A; Song F; Sheldon T BMJ; 1995 Nov; 311(7015):1303-4. PubMed ID: 7496260 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]