Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational and Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kromrey, J. D.
Right arrow Articles by Rendina-Gobioff, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

On Knowing What We Do Not Know

An Empirical Comparison of Methods to Detect Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis

Jeffrey D. Kromrey

University of South Florida, kromrey{at}tempest.coedu.usf.edu

Gianna Rendina-Gobioff

University of South Florida

The performance of methods for detecting publication bias in meta-analysis was evaluated using Monte Carlo methods. Four methods of bias detection were investigated: Begg’s rank correlation, Egger’s regression, funnel plot regression, and trim and fill. Five factors were included in the simulation design: number of primary studies in each meta-analysis, sample sizes of primary studies, population variances in primary studies, magnitude of population effect size, and magnitude of selection bias. Results were evaluated in terms of Type I error control and statistical power. Results suggest poor Type I error control in many conditions for all of the methods examined. One exception was the Begg’s rank correlation method using sample size rather than the estimated variance. Statistical power was typically very low for conditions in which Type I error rates were adequately controlled, although power increased with larger sample sizes in the primary studies and larger numbers of studies in the meta-analysis.

Key Words: publication bias • detection • meta-analysis • effect size • simulation

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 66, No. 3, 357-373 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0013164405278585
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?