Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40519423›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Proposed Modifiable Scoring Criteria for Studies Included in Meta-Analyses to Reduce Measurement Bias.

Gabriel Vizgan, Bernard von Simson, Joey Nicholson, Gabrielle Gold-von Simson

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Gabriel VizganUrology, State University of New York (SUNY) Downstate Health Sciences University, New York, USA.
Bernard von SimsonEconomics and Global Affairs, New York University, New York, USA.
Joey NicholsonStatistics, New York University (NYU) Grossman School of Medicine NYU Langone Health, New York, USA.
Gabrielle Gold-von SimsonPediatrics, New York University (NYU) Grossman School of Medicine NYU Langone Health, New York, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Due to inconsistencies in literature reporting, there is potential for bias in meta-regression calculations used in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. To address this, we propose a novel modifiable point-based scoring system, highlighting to readers the scientific weight of included studies relative to the conclusion of the review's authors. Such a scoring system will have the added benefit of also highlighting data points that are underrepresented. This system is ideal for synthesizing reviews on pathologies poorly represented in the literature. The scoring system described will decrease bias and enable impactful interpretation to ultimately lead to standard practice adaptation.

Indexed as

bias identificationmeta-analysisnovel scoring systemsystemic reviewvalidity assessment

Identifiers

PMID40519423
PMCPMC12164953

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.