Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32456676›Full record

SynthesisSystematic reviews2020

Locating unregistered and unreported data for use in a social science systematic review and meta-analysis.

Joshua R Polanin, Dorothy L Espelage, Jennifer K Grotpeter, Alberto Valido, Katherine M Ingram, Cagil Torgal, America El Sheikh, Luz E Robinson

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Interventions to Decrease Cyberbullying Perpetration and Victimization.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Joshua R PolaninAmerican Institutes for Research, 1000 Thomas Jefferson St. NW, Washington, DC, 20007, USA. jpolanin@air.org.ORCID 0000-0001-5100-0164
Dorothy L EspelageUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, USA.
Jennifer K GrotpeterDevelopment Services Group, Inc., Bethesda, USA.
Alberto ValidoUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, USA.
Katherine M IngramUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, USA.
Cagil TorgalUniversity of Florida, Gainesville, USA.
America El SheikhUniversity of Florida, Gainesville, USA.
Luz E RobinsonUniversity of Florida, Gainesville, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Meta-analysts rely on the availability of data from previously conducted studies. That is, they rely on primary study authors to register their outcome data, either in a study's text or on publicly available websites, and report the results of their work, either again in a study's text or on publicly accessible data repositories. If a primary study author does not register data collection and similarly does not report the data collection results, the meta-analyst is at risk of failing to include the collected data. The purpose of this study is to attempt to locate one type of meta-analytic data: findings from studies that neither registered nor reported the collected outcome data. To do so, we conducted a large-scale search for potential studies and emailed an author query request to more than 600 primary study authors to ask if they had collected eligible outcome data. We received responses from 75 authors (12.3%), three of whom sent eligible findings. The results of our search confirmed our proof of concept (i.e., that authors collect data but fail to register or report it publicly), and the meta-analytic results indicated that excluding the identified studies would change some of our substantive conclusions. Cost analyses indicated, however, a high price to finding the missing studies. We end by reaffirming our calls for greater adoption of primary study pre-registration as well as data archiving in publicly available repositories.

Indexed as

Social SciencesData CollectionHumans

Identifiers

PMID32456676
PMCPMC7251843

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.