Systematic Analysis of Publication Bias in Neurosurgery Meta-Analyses

Area of Science:

• Neurosurgery
• Medical Research Methodology
• Biostatistics

Background:

• Publication bias, the tendency to publish positive results over negative or insignificant ones, can distort meta-analysis interpretations.
• This bias is prevalent in biomedical literature, necessitating methods like funnel plots, Begg, and Egger tests for assessment.
• Statistical tools exist to identify and mitigate publication bias in research synthesis.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate the extent to which publication bias is addressed in neurosurgical meta-analyses.
• Assessing the current practices in handling publication bias within the neurosurgical field.
• Determining the adequacy of publication bias assessment in neurosurgical literature.

Main Methods:

• A systematic literature search was performed on meta-analyses from leading neurosurgery journals.
• Data extraction focused on the identification, assessment, and correction of publication bias.
• Analysis included the prevalence of bias assessment and adjustment methods used.

Main Results:

• Out of 190 meta-analyses, 108 (56.8%) assessed publication bias.
• Of those assessing bias, 40 (37.0%) found evidence of it, but only 11 (27.5%) applied corrections (e.g., trim-and-fill).
• A significant majority (58.4%) of meta-analyses either ignored publication bias or failed to adjust for it when detected.

Conclusions:

• Publication bias is a persistent issue largely unaddressed in neurosurgical meta-analyses.
• The current practices suggest a need for improved methodology in handling publication bias in this specialty.
• Failure to account for publication bias may lead to biased conclusions in neurosurgical research synthesis.