Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Publication bias can be contained through better-powered studies, enhanced research standards, and careful consideration of true and non-true relationships. [46] Better-powered studies refer to large studies that deliver definitive results or test major concepts and lead to low-bias meta-analysis.
Funding bias, also known as sponsorship bias, funding outcome bias, funding publication bias, and funding effect, is a tendency of a scientific study to support the interests of the study's financial sponsor. This phenomenon is recognized sufficiently that researchers undertake studies to examine bias in past published studies.
A funnel plot is a scatterplot of treatment effect against a measure of study precision. It is used primarily as a visual aid for detecting bias or systematic heterogeneity. A symmetric inverted funnel shape arises from a ‘well-behaved’ data set, in which publication bias is unlikely. An asymmetric funnel indicates a relationship between ...
Publication of studies on p-hacking and questionable research practices: Since the late 2000s, a number of studies in metascience showed how commonly adopted practices in many scientific fields, such as exploiting the flexibility of the process of data collection and reporting, could greatly increase the probability of false positive results.
Even if a study meets the benchmark requirements for and , and is free of bias, there is still a 36% probability that a paper reporting a positive result will be incorrect; if the base probability of a true result is lower, then this will push the PPV lower too. Furthermore, there is strong evidence that the average statistical power of a study ...
Some research ethics boards, [65] universities, [61] and national laws [66] prohibit gag clauses. Gag clauses may not be legally enforceable if compliance would cause sufficient public harm. [61] Non-publication has been found to be more common in industry-funded trials, contributing to publication bias. [65]
The publication or nonpublication of research findings, depend on the nature and direction of the results. Although medical writers have acknowledged the problem of reporting biases for over a century, [12] it was not until the second half of the 20th century that researchers began to investigate the sources and size of the problem of reporting biases.
If sufficiently many scientists study a phenomenon, some will find statistically significant results by chance, and these are the experiments submitted for publication. Additionally, papers showing positive results may be more appealing to editors. [3] This problem is known as positive results bias, a type of publication bias. To combat this ...