Estimating publication bias in meta‐analyses of peer‐reviewed studies: A meta‐meta‐analysis across disciplines and journal tiers
Abstract
Selective publication and reporting in individual papers compromise the scientific record, but are meta-analyses as compromised as their constituent studies? We systematically sampled 63 meta-analyses (each comprising at least 40 studies) in PLoS One, top medical journals, top psychology journals, and Metalab, an online, open-data database of developmental psychology meta-analyses. We empirically estimated publication bias in each, including...
Paper Details
Title
Estimating publication bias in meta‐analyses of peer‐reviewed studies: A meta‐meta‐analysis across disciplines and journal tiers
Published Date
Nov 14, 2020
Journal
Volume
12
Issue
2
Pages
176 - 191
Citation AnalysisPro
You’ll need to upgrade your plan to Pro
Looking to understand the true influence of a researcher’s work across journals & affiliations?
- Scinapse’s Top 10 Citation Journals & Affiliations graph reveals the quality and authenticity of citations received by a paper.
- Discover whether citations have been inflated due to self-citations, or if citations include institutional bias.
Notes
History