Shared publicly  - 
"They conclude, 'We found no evidence of publication bias in reports on publication bias.' But of course that’s the sort of finding regarding publication bias of findings on publication bias that you’d expect would get published. What we really need is a careful meta-analysis to estimate the level of publication bias in studies of publication bias of studies of publication bias." (via Marginal Revolution)
Publication bias is a well known phenomenon in clinical literature, in which positive results have a better chance of being published, are published earlier, and are published in journals with higher ...
Kathrin Passig's profile photoKarin Koller's profile photo
Related: ("I’ve suggested that academia functions primarily to credential people as impressive and interesting in certain ways, so outsiders, like students and patron, can gain prestige by affiliating with them. If so, and if those who publish weak-method positive-results are in fact more impressive and interesting than those who publish stronger-method negative-results, there is little prospect to get rid of this publication bias.")
Bei klinischen Publikationen muss auch berücksichtigt werden, dass sehr oft Pharmafirmen professionelle Schreiber bezahlen, die die Publikationen schreiben im Namen der Ärzte, die die Studien durchgeführt haben. Also Bias schon vor der Publikation.
Add a comment...