Abstract:BackgroundThe validity of a meta-analysis can be understood better in light of the possible impact of publication bias. The majority of the methods to investigate publication bias in terms of small study-effects are developed for meta-analyses of intervention studies, leaving authors of diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) systematic reviews with limited guidance. The aim of this study was to evaluate if and how publication bias was assessed in meta-analyses of DTA, and to compare the results of various statistical methods used to assess publication bias.MethodsA systematic search was initiated to identify DTA reviews with a meta-analysis published between September 2011 and January 2012. We extracted all information about publication bias from the reviews and the two-by-two tables. Existing statistical methods for the detection of publication bias were applied on data from the included studies.ResultsOut of 1,335 references, 114 reviews could be included. Publication bias was explicitly mentioned in 75 reviews (65.8%) and 47 of these had performed statistical methods to investigate publication bias in terms of small study-effects: 6 by drawing funnel plots, 16 by statistical testing and 25 by applying both methods. The applied tests were Egger’s test (n = 18), Deeks’ test (n = 12), Begg’s test (n = 5), both the Egger and Begg tests (n = 4), and other tests (n = 2). Our own comparison of the results of Begg’s, Egger’s and Deeks’ test for 92 meta-analyses indicated that up to 34% of the results did not correspond with one another.ConclusionsThe majority of DTA review authors mention or investigate publication bias. They mainly use suboptimal methods like the Begg and Egger tests that are not developed for DTA meta-analyses. Our comparison of the Begg, Egger and Deeks tests indicated that these tests do give different results and thus are not interchangeable. Deeks’ test is recommended for DTA meta-analyses and should be preferred.

Statistical Methods for Dealing with Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis

A modified regression method to test publication bias in meta-analyses with binary outcomes

Empirical Comparison of Publication Bias Tests in Meta-Analysis

Systematic Evaluation and Comparison of Statistical Tests for Publication Bias

A regression-based method for detecting publication bias in multivariate meta-analysis

Investigating and dealing with publication bias and other reporting biases in meta‐analyses of health research: A review

Methods for Assessing Inverse Publication Bias of Adverse Events

Sensitivity analysis for publication bias in meta‐analyses

Robust Point and Variance Estimation for Meta‐analyses with Selective Reporting and Dependent Effect Sizes

A Bayesian "Fill-In" Method for Correcting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis.

Methods for testing publication bias in ecological and evolutionary meta‐analyses

Estimating the change in meta-analytic effect size estimates after the application of publication bias adjustment methods.

P Value–driven Methods Were Underpowered to Detect Publication Bias: Analysis of Cochrane Review Meta-Analyses

Investigation of publication bias in meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy: a meta-epidemiological study

Hybrid test for publication bias in meta-analysis

Quantitative bias analysis methods for summary level epidemiologic data in the peer-reviewed literature: a systematic review

Copas-Heckman-type Sensitivity Analysis for Publication Bias in Rare-Event Meta-Analysis under the Framework of the Generalized Linear Mixed Model

Adjusting for Publication Bias in JASP and R: Selection Models, PET-PEESE, and Robust Bayesian Meta-Analysis

Using selection models to assess sensitivity to publication bias: A tutorial and call for more routine use

Sensitivity analysis for publication bias in meta-analysis of sparse data based on exact likelihood

Methods to Address Confounding and Other Biases in Meta-Analyses: Review and Recommendations