Testing for publication bias in diagnostic meta-analysis: a simulation study

Stat Med. 2014 Aug 15;33(18):3061-77. doi: 10.1002/sim.6177. Epub 2014 Apr 20.

Abstract

The present study investigates the performance of several statistical tests to detect publication bias in diagnostic meta-analysis by means of simulation. While bivariate models should be used to pool data from primary studies in diagnostic meta-analysis, univariate measures of diagnostic accuracy are preferable for the purpose of detecting publication bias. In contrast to earlier research, which focused solely on the diagnostic odds ratio or its logarithm ( ln ω), the tests are combined with four different univariate measures of diagnostic accuracy. For each combination of test and univariate measure, both type I error rate and statistical power are examined under diverse conditions. The results indicate that tests based on linear regression or rank correlation cannot be recommended in diagnostic meta-analysis, because type I error rates are either inflated or power is too low, irrespective of the applied univariate measure. In contrast, the combination of trim and fill and ln ω has non-inflated or only slightly inflated type I error rates and medium to high power, even under extreme circumstances (at least when the number of studies per meta-analysis is large enough). Therefore, we recommend the application of trim and fill combined with ln ω to detect funnel plot asymmetry in diagnostic meta-analysis.

Keywords: diagnostic meta-analysis; diagnostic odds ratio; publication bias; simulation study; trim and fill.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Biostatistics
  • Computer Simulation
  • Diagnosis*
  • Humans
  • Meta-Analysis as Topic*
  • Models, Statistical
  • Odds Ratio
  • Publication Bias / statistics & numerical data*
  • Regression Analysis