Including non-public data and studies in systematic reviews and systematic maps.
Including non-public data and studies in systematic reviews and systematic maps.
复制标题
包括系统评价和系统地图中的非公开数据和研究。
DOI：
10.1016/j.envint.2016.12.003
复制
发表时间：
2017
影响因子：
11.8
通讯作者：
Haddaway NR
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Haddaway NR
系统性综述和图谱应基于现有最佳证据，综述者应尽一切合理努力获取并纳入潜在相关研究。然而，审查人员可能无法考虑所有现有证据，因为一些数据和研究可能无法公开。在综述中纳入非公开研究提供了一个宝贵的机会，以增加系统性综述/地图的全面性，潜在地减轻出版偏见的负面影响。非公开研究可能有多种原因：有些研究可能仍在出版过程中（出版可能需要很长时间）;有些研究可能由于作者/出版商的限制而未出版;出版偏见可能使其难以发表不重要或负面的结果。在这里，我们考虑这些非公开研究可能采取的形式，以及将它们纳入系统评价和地图的影响。审查人员应仔细考虑纳入非公开研究的利弊，权衡偏见风险与提高全面性的好处。与所有系统性综述和地图一样，综述者必须对获取数据的方法保持透明，并避免其综合中的偏倚风险。在证据库中可能存在非公开数据的情况下，我们为审查者提出了初步建议。
Systematic reviews and maps should be based on the best available evidence, and reviewers should make all reasonable efforts to source and include potentially relevant studies. However, reviewers may not be able to consider all existing evidence, since some data and studies may not be publicly available. Includingnon-publicstudies in reviews provides a valuable opportunity to increase systematic review/map comprehensiveness, potentially mitigating negative impacts of publication bias. Studies may be non-public for many reasons: some may still be in the process of being published (publication can take a long time); some may not be published due to author/publisher restrictions; publication bias may make it difficult to publish non-significant or negative results. Here, we consider what forms these non-public studies may take and the implications of including them in systematic reviews and maps. Reviewers should carefully consider the advantages and disadvantages of including non-public studies, weighing risks of bias against benefits of increased comprehensiveness. As with all systematic reviews and maps, reviewers must be transparent about methods used to obtain data and avoid risks of bias in their synthesis. We make tentative suggestions for reviewers in situations where non-public data may be present in an evidence base.
登录
查看更多内容
石井，N.；A.W.M.辛普森；C.C.阿什利：科学。
DOI：
--
发表时间：
--
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
通讯作者：
--
系统评价能否为转基因生物风险评估和风险管理提供信息？
影响因子：
5.7
作者：
C. Kohl;G. Frampton;J. Sweet;A. Spök;Neal R Haddaway;R. Wilhelm;Stefan Unger;J. Schiemann
通讯作者：
J. Schiemann
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Dwan K;Gamble C;Williamson PR;Kirkham JJ;Reporting Bias Group
通讯作者：
Reporting Bias Group
影响因子：
2.6
作者：
Haddaway NR;Verhoeven JT
通讯作者：
Verhoeven JT
共享详细的研究数据与引用率的提高相关。
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Piwowar HA;Day RS;Fridsma DB
通讯作者：
Fridsma DB