Comparison of bias adjustment methods in meta-analysis suggests that quality effects modeling may have less limitations than other approaches
Stone, Jennifer; Glass, Kathryn; Munn, Zachary; Tugwell, Peter; Doi, Suhail A R
Background The quality of primary research is commonly assessed before inclusion in meta-analyses. Findings are discussed in the context of the quality appraisal by categorizing studies according to risk of bias. The impact of appraised risk of bias on study outcomes is 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. The...[Show more]
|Collections||ANU Research Publications|
|Source:||Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|
|01_Stone_Comparison_of_bias_adjustment_2020.pdf||277.45 kB||Adobe PDF||Request a copy|
Items in Open Research are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
Updated: 17 November 2022/ Responsible Officer: University Librarian/ Page Contact: Library Systems & Web Coordinator