Skip to main content
Journal cover image

GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence--publication bias.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Guyatt, GH; Oxman, AD; Montori, V; Vist, G; Kunz, R; Brozek, J; Alonso-Coello, P; Djulbegovic, B; Atkins, D; Falck-Ytter, Y; Williams, JW ...
Published in: J Clin Epidemiol
December 2011

In the GRADE approach, randomized trials start as high-quality evidence and observational studies as low-quality evidence, but both can be rated down if a body of evidence is associated with a high risk of publication bias. Even when individual studies included in best-evidence summaries have a low risk of bias, publication bias can result in substantial overestimates of effect. Authors should suspect publication bias when available evidence comes from a number of small studies, most of which have been commercially funded. A number of approaches based on examination of the pattern of data are available to help assess publication bias. The most popular of these is the funnel plot; all, however, have substantial limitations. Publication bias is likely frequent, and caution in the face of early results, particularly with small sample size and number of events, is warranted.

Duke Scholars

Published In

J Clin Epidemiol

DOI

EISSN

1878-5921

Publication Date

December 2011

Volume

64

Issue

12

Start / End Page

1277 / 1282

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Statistics as Topic
  • Review Literature as Topic
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
  • Publication Bias
  • Practice Guidelines as Topic
  • Meta-Analysis as Topic
  • Evidence-Based Medicine
  • Epidemiology
  • Drug Industry
  • Cross-Sectional Studies
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Montori, V., Vist, G., Kunz, R., Brozek, J., … Schünemann, H. J. (2011). GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence--publication bias. J Clin Epidemiol, 64(12), 1277–1282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.01.011
Guyatt, Gordon H., Andrew D. Oxman, Victor Montori, Gunn Vist, Regina Kunz, Jan Brozek, Pablo Alonso-Coello, et al. “GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence--publication bias.J Clin Epidemiol 64, no. 12 (December 2011): 1277–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.01.011.
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Montori V, Vist G, Kunz R, Brozek J, et al. GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence--publication bias. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Dec;64(12):1277–82.
Guyatt, Gordon H., et al. “GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence--publication bias.J Clin Epidemiol, vol. 64, no. 12, Dec. 2011, pp. 1277–82. Pubmed, doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.01.011.
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Montori V, Vist G, Kunz R, Brozek J, Alonso-Coello P, Djulbegovic B, Atkins D, Falck-Ytter Y, Williams JW, Meerpohl J, Norris SL, Akl EA, Schünemann HJ. GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence--publication bias. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Dec;64(12):1277–1282.
Journal cover image

Published In

J Clin Epidemiol

DOI

EISSN

1878-5921

Publication Date

December 2011

Volume

64

Issue

12

Start / End Page

1277 / 1282

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Statistics as Topic
  • Review Literature as Topic
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
  • Publication Bias
  • Practice Guidelines as Topic
  • Meta-Analysis as Topic
  • Evidence-Based Medicine
  • Epidemiology
  • Drug Industry
  • Cross-Sectional Studies