Detecting and adjusting for small-study effects in meta-analysis

Could It Be Better to Discard 90% of the Data? A Statistical Paradox

(2010) T. D. Stanley et al.   AMERICAN STATISTICIAN

Assessing the Sensitivity of Meta-analysis to Selection Bias: A Multiple Imputation Approach

(2010) James Carpenter et al.   BIOMETRICS

Interpretation of tests of heterogeneity and bias in meta-analysis

(2010) John P. A. Ioannidis   JOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE

Assessing publication bias in meta-analyses in the presence of between-study heterogeneity

(2010) Jaime L. Peters et al.   JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES A-STATISTICS IN SOCIETY

Assessment of regression-based methods to adjust for publication bias through a comprehensive simulation study

(2009) Santiago G Moreno et al.   BMC Medical Research Methodology

The evidence provided by a single trial is less reliable than its statistical analysis suggests

(2009) George F. Borm et al.   JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY

Are large trials less reliable than small trials?

(2009) Gerta Rücker et al.   JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY

Empirical evaluation showed that the Copas selection model provided a useful summary in 80% of meta-analyses

(2009) James R. Carpenter et al.   JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY

Empirical evaluation suggests Copas selection model preferable to trim-and-fill method for selection bias in meta-analysis

(2009) Guido Schwarzer et al.   JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY

Undue reliance on I 2 in assessing heterogeneity may mislead

(2008) Gerta Rücker et al.   BMC Medical Research Methodology

A re-evaluation of random-effects meta-analysis

(2008) Julian P. T. Higgins et al.   JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES A-STATISTICS IN SOCIETY

A robustP-value for treatment effect in meta-analysis with publication bias

(2008) John B. Copas et al.   STATISTICS IN MEDICINE

Arcsine test for publication bias in meta-analyses with binary outcomes

(2007) Gerta Rücker et al.   STATISTICS IN MEDICINE