Statistical Multiplicity in Systematic Reviews of Anaesthesia Interventions: A Quantification and Comparison between Cochrane and Non-Cochrane Reviews

Georgina Imberger, Alexandra Hedvig Damgaard Vejlby, Sara Bohnstedt Hansen, Ann Møller, Jørn Wetterslev

30 Citationer (Scopus)

Abstract

Systematic reviews with meta-analyses often contain many statistical tests. This multiplicity may increase the risk of type I error. Few attempts have been made to address the problem of statistical multiplicity in systematic reviews. Before the implications are properly considered, the size of the issue deserves clarification. Because of the emphasis on bias evaluation and because of the editorial processes involved, Cochrane reviews may contain more multiplicity than their non-Cochrane counterparts. This study measured the quantity of statistical multiplicity present in a population of systematic reviews and aimed to assess whether this quantity is different in Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftP L o S One
Vol/bind6
Udgave nummer12
Sider (fra-til)e28422
ISSN1932-6203
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2011

Fingeraftryk

Dyk ned i forskningsemnerne om 'Statistical Multiplicity in Systematic Reviews of Anaesthesia Interventions: A Quantification and Comparison between Cochrane and Non-Cochrane Reviews'. Sammen danner de et unikt fingeraftryk.

Citationsformater