方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法；存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| 发表偏倚× | 系统评价× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域≠ | 研究统计学 | 学术写作 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 1979 | 1992 |
| 提出者≠ | Robert Rosenthal | Cochrane Collaboration (1992) |
| 类型≠ | Concept | Document Type |
| 开创性文献≠ | Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3), 638–641. DOI ↗ | Page, M. J., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. DOI ↗ |
| 别名 | file drawer problem, selective reporting, outcome reporting bias, funnel plot asymmetry | systematic literature review, evidence synthesis, scoping review, mapping review |
| 相关≠ | 4 | 3 |
| 摘要≠ | Publication bias occurs when the results of a study influence whether the study is published. Typically, studies with statistically significant or positive results are more likely to be published than studies with non-significant or negative results, even if both are scientifically valid. This bias distorts the published literature, making treatments appear more effective than they actually are. Rosenthal (1979) termed this the 'file drawer problem': research with null results sits in file drawers, unpublished, creating a biased sample of published evidence. Funnel plots and statistical tests (e.g., Egger test) can detect asymmetry suggesting publication bias; meta-analyses must account for this bias. | A systematic review is a structured, transparent synthesis of all available evidence addressing a specific research question. Unlike narrative reviews, systematic reviews employ comprehensive database searches, predefined selection criteria, quality assessment, and rigorous reporting (PRISMA guideline). The Cochrane Collaboration (founded 1992) established this methodology as the gold standard for evidence synthesis in healthcare and social sciences. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|