Comparison of bias adjustment methods in meta-analysis suggests that quality effects modelling may have less limitations than other approaches

The quality of primary research is commonly assessed prior to inclusion in meta-analyses. Findings are discussed in the context of the quality appraisal by categorising studies according to risk of bias. The impact of appraised risk of bias on study outcomes are typically judged by the reader, however several methods have been developed to quantify this risk of bias assessment and incorporate it into the pooled results of meta-analysis; a process known as bias-adjustment. We discuss the advantages and limitations of methods for bias-adjustment in meta-analysis to inform those using and synthesising research evidence in clinical practice and academia.

Source: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology - September 17, 2019 Category: Epidemiology Authors: Jennifer Stone, Kathryn Glass, Zachary Munn, Peter Tugwell, Suhail A.R. Doi Tags: Review Source Type: research