Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Indeed, a review of pharmaceutical studies revealed that research funded by drug companies was less likely to be published, but the drug-company-funded research that was published was more likely to report outcomes favorable to the sponsor. [5] A double-blind study with only objective measures is less likely to be biased to support a given ...
[6] [8] Research interpretation bias or spin is prevalent across medical publications irrespective of discipline i.e. surgical versus medical and irrespective of journal ranking or study's level-of-evidence hierarchy. Notable bias (spin) has been reported in the interpretation of results of randomized control trials, although these study ...
It was established in 1975 and the journal is co-edited by Raya Muttarak and Joshua Wilde. The journal covers population studies, the relationships between population and economic, environmental, and social change, and related thinking on public policy. Content types are original research articles, commentaries, data and perspectives on ...
Common sources of bias include political, financial, religious, philosophical, or other beliefs. Although a source may be biased, it may be reliable in the specific context. When dealing with a potentially biased source, editors should consider whether the source meets the normal requirements for reliable sources, such as editorial control, a ...
Publication bias is a type of bias with regard to what academic research is likely to be published because of a tendency among researchers and journal editors to prefer some outcomes rather than others (e.g., results showing a significant finding), which leads to a problematic bias in the published literature. [139]
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 ...
The majority of the world's population lives in the Northern Hemisphere, which contributes toward a selection bias to a Northern Hemisphere perspective. This selection bias interacts with the other causes of systemic bias discussed above, which slants the selection to a pro-Northern Hemisphere perspective. [15]
Self-selection bias or a volunteer bias in studies offer further threats to the validity of a study as these participants may have intrinsically different characteristics from the target population of the study. [19] Studies have shown that volunteers tend to come from a higher social standing than from a lower socio-economic background. [20]