ArticleBehavior research methods2024
Correcting for outcome reporting bias in a meta-analysis: A meta-regression approach.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Esmolol as an Adjunct in Multimodal Anesthesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Its Opioid-Sparing and Analgesic Effects.Anesthesia and analgesia · 2026Pooled it
- Stroke Neurorehabilitation and the Role of Motor Imagery Training: Do ARAT and Barthel Index Improvements Support Its Clinical Use? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Pooled it
- Compliance of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in ophthalmology with the PRISMA statement: an AI-based assessment and longitudinal comparison with 2017 data.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- Correcting for publication bias in a meta-analysis with the p-uniform* method.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Review
- The threat of serious outcome reporting bias in randomized controlled trials on acute ischemic stroke to evidence synthesis: a meta-epidemiological study.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2025Review
- Addressing Outcome Reporting Bias in Meta-Analysis: A Selection Model Perspective.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Motor Imagery for Post-Stroke Upper Limb Recovery: A Meta-Analysis of RCTs on Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity Scores.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Outcome reporting bias (ORB) refers to the biasing effect caused by researchers selectively reporting outcomes within a study based on their statistical significance. ORB leads to inflated effect size estimates in meta-analysis if only the outcome with the largest effect size is reported due to ORB. We propose a new method (CORB) to correct for ORB that includes an estimate of the variability of the outcomes' effect size as a moderator in a meta-regression model. An estimate of the variability of the outcomes' effect size can be computed by assuming a correlation among the outcomes. Results of a Monte-Carlo simulation study showed that the effect size in meta-analyses may be severely overestimated without correcting for ORB. Estimates of CORB are close to the true effect size when overestimation caused by ORB is the largest. Applying the method to a meta-analysis on the effect of playing violent video games on aggression showed that the effect size estimate decreased when correcting for ORB. We recommend to routinely apply methods to correct for ORB in any meta-analysis. We provide annotated R code and functions to help researchers apply the CORB method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.