GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence-publication bias
Date Issued
2011-01-01
Author(s)
Guyatt, Gordon H.
Oxman, Andrew D.
Montori, Victor
Vist, Gunn
Brozek, Jan
Alonso-Coello, Pablo
Djulbegovic, Ben
Atkins, David
Falck-Ytter, Yngve
Williams, John W.
Meerpohl, Joerg
Norris, Susan L.
Akl, Elie A.
Schuenemann, Holger J.
DOI
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.01.011
Abstract
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.