Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German.

阅读量:

179

作者:

M Egger

展开

摘要:

BACKGROUND: Some randomised controlled trials (RCTs) done in German-speaking Europe are published in international English-language journals and others in national German-language journals. We assessed whether authors are more likely to report trials with statistically significant results in English than in German. METHODS: We studied pairs of RCT reports, matched for first author and time of publication, with one report published in German and the other in English. Pairs were identified from reports round in a manual search of five leading German-language journals and from reports published by the same authors in English found on Medline. Quality of methods and reporting were assessed with two different scales by two investigators who were unaware of authors' identities, affiliations, and other characteristics of trial reports. Main study endpoints were selected by two investigators who were unaware of trial results. Our main outcome was the number of pairs of studies in which the levels of significance (shown by p values) were discordant. FINDINGS: 62 eligible pairs of reports were identified but 19 (31%) were excluded because they were duplicate publications. A further three pairs (5%) were excluded because no p values were given. The remaining 40 pairs were analysed. Design characteristics and quality features were similar for reports in both languages. Only 35% of German-language articles, compared with 62% of English-language articles, reported significant (p < 0.05) differences in the main endpoint between study and control groups (p = 0.002 by McNemar's test). Logistic regression showed that the only characteristic that predicted publication in an English-language journal was a significant result. The odds ratio for publication of trials with significant results in English was 3.75 (95% CI 1.25-11.3). INTERPRETATION: Authors were more likely to publish RCTs in an English-language journal if the results were statistically significant. English language bias may, therefore, be introduced in reviews and meta-analyses if they include only trials reported in English. The effort of the Cochrane Collaboration to identify as many controlled trials as possible, through the manual search of many medical journals published in different languages will help to reduce such bias.

展开

DOI:

10.1016/S0140-6736(97)02419-7

被引量:

3566

年份:

1997

相似文献

参考文献

引证文献

来源期刊

Lancet
1997-08-02

引用走势

2010
被引量:310

辅助模式

0

引用

文献可以批量引用啦~
欢迎点我试用!

关于我们

百度学术集成海量学术资源,融合人工智能、深度学习、大数据分析等技术,为科研工作者提供全面快捷的学术服务。在这里我们保持学习的态度,不忘初心,砥砺前行。
了解更多>>

友情链接

百度云百度翻译

联系我们

合作与服务

期刊合作 图书馆合作 下载产品手册

©2025 Baidu 百度学术声明 使用百度前必读

引用