Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Outcome selection bias in meta-analysis.

P R Williamson1, C Gamble, D G Altman

  • 1Centre for Medical Statistics and Health Evaluation, Shelley's Cottage, Brownlow Street, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3GS, UK. prw@liv.ac.uk

Statistical Methods in Medical Research
|October 27, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Seascape connectivity: evidence, knowledge gaps and implications for temperate coastal ecosystem restoration practice and policy.

npj ocean sustainability·2025
Same author

The development and acceptability of an educational and training intervention for recruiters to neonatal trials: the TRAIN project.

BMC medical research methodology·2023
Same author

Understanding and optimising patient and public involvement in trial oversight: an ethnographic study of eight clinical trials.

Trials·2020
Same author

Metabolic measures 12 months after a randomised controlled trial of treatment of clozapine associated obesity and diabetes with exenatide (CODEX).

Journal of psychiatric research·2020
Same author

Value of surgical pilot and feasibility study protocols.

The British journal of surgery·2019
Same author

CONSORT 2010 statement: extension checklist for reporting within person randomised trials.

The British journal of dermatology·2019
Same journal

A joint model for a longitudinal outcome and a progressive multistate model under a mixed observation scheme.

Statistical methods in medical research·2026
Same journal

Efficient semi-supervised estimation of optimal individualized treatment regimes with survival outcome.

Statistical methods in medical research·2026
Same journal

Asymptotic online FWER control for dependent test statistics.

Statistical methods in medical research·2026
Same journal

Regression analysis of misclassified current status data with potentially unknown test accuracy.

Statistical methods in medical research·2026
Same journal

Bayesian multivariate linear mixed-effects models with varied association structures.

Statistical methods in medical research·2026
Same journal

Inference about the ratio of age-standardized rates between two overlapping populations.

Statistical methods in medical research·2026
See all related articles

Selective reporting of trial outcomes, alongside publication bias, threatens meta-analysis validity. This review explores within-study selective reporting, its prevalence, impact, detection, and solutions for systematic reviews.

Area of Science:

  • Medical research methodology
  • Biostatistics
  • Evidence-based medicine

Background:

  • Publication bias is a known threat to meta-analysis validity.
  • Selective reporting of outcomes within studies is an emerging threat.
  • Multiple outcome measures exist for many diseases, allowing for selection.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To define within-study selective reporting.
  • To assess the prevalence and reasons for selective reporting.
  • To discuss the implications, detection, and solutions for selective reporting in research.

Main Methods:

  • Literature review and synthesis of existing evidence on selective reporting.
  • Analysis of the impact of selective reporting on research interpretation.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Exploration of methods for detecting and mitigating selective reporting.

    • Main Results:

    • Within-study selective reporting involves choosing which outcomes to publish, often favoring statistically significant results.
    • This practice is common and can significantly mislead readers and researchers.
    • Detection involves comparing reported outcomes to planned outcomes, though this can be challenging.

    Conclusions:

    • Selective reporting, like publication bias, compromises the integrity of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
    • Routine investigation of both publication bias and selective reporting is recommended for systematic reviews.
    • Addressing selective reporting is crucial for improving the reliability of published research findings.