Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Methodological quality of meta-analyses
View graph of relations

Methodological quality of meta-analyses: matched-pairs comparison over time and between industry sponsored and academic-sponsored reports

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Published

Standard

Methodological quality of meta-analyses : matched-pairs comparison over time and between industry sponsored and academic-sponsored reports. / Lane, Peter W.; Higgins, Julian P. T.; Anagnostelis, Betsy; Anzures-Cabrera, Judith; Baker, Nigel F.; Cappelleri, Joseph C.; Haughie, Scott; Hollis, Sally; Lewis, Steff C.; Moneuse, Patrick; Whitehead, Anne.

In: Research Synthesis Methods, Vol. 4, No. 4, 12.2013, p. 342-350.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Harvard

Lane, PW, Higgins, JPT, Anagnostelis, B, Anzures-Cabrera, J, Baker, NF, Cappelleri, JC, Haughie, S, Hollis, S, Lewis, SC, Moneuse, P & Whitehead, A 2013, 'Methodological quality of meta-analyses: matched-pairs comparison over time and between industry sponsored and academic-sponsored reports', Research Synthesis Methods, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 342-350. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1072

APA

Lane, P. W., Higgins, J. P. T., Anagnostelis, B., Anzures-Cabrera, J., Baker, N. F., Cappelleri, J. C., Haughie, S., Hollis, S., Lewis, S. C., Moneuse, P., & Whitehead, A. (2013). Methodological quality of meta-analyses: matched-pairs comparison over time and between industry sponsored and academic-sponsored reports. Research Synthesis Methods, 4(4), 342-350. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1072

Vancouver

Lane PW, Higgins JPT, Anagnostelis B, Anzures-Cabrera J, Baker NF, Cappelleri JC et al. Methodological quality of meta-analyses: matched-pairs comparison over time and between industry sponsored and academic-sponsored reports. Research Synthesis Methods. 2013 Dec;4(4):342-350. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1072

Author

Lane, Peter W. ; Higgins, Julian P. T. ; Anagnostelis, Betsy ; Anzures-Cabrera, Judith ; Baker, Nigel F. ; Cappelleri, Joseph C. ; Haughie, Scott ; Hollis, Sally ; Lewis, Steff C. ; Moneuse, Patrick ; Whitehead, Anne. / Methodological quality of meta-analyses : matched-pairs comparison over time and between industry sponsored and academic-sponsored reports. In: Research Synthesis Methods. 2013 ; Vol. 4, No. 4. pp. 342-350.

Bibtex

@article{2b40872643a04f1cbdaab24d35d690a3,
title = "Methodological quality of meta-analyses: matched-pairs comparison over time and between industry sponsored and academic-sponsored reports",
abstract = "Context: Meta-analyses are regularly used to inform healthcare decisions. Concerns have been expressed about the quality of meta-analyses and, in particular, about those supported by the pharmaceutical industry.Objective: The objective of this study is to compare the quality of pharmaceutical-industry-supported meta-analyses with academic meta-analyses and of meta-analyses published before and after companies started to disclose their data.Data Sources: We identified industry-supported meta-analyses by searching the Scopus bibliographic database, using author affiliations. We matched each industry-supported meta-analysis with an academic meta-analysis using high-level MeSH terms in PubMed.Study Selection: We included meta-analyses of randomized trials assessing the efficacy or safety of any pharmaceutical intervention in humans, published in 2002–2004 or 2008–2009. Cochrane reviews were excluded. Two individuals independently selected papers, with discrepancies resolved by two furtherindividuals.Assessment: We developed and piloted a quality-assessment tool, consisting of 43 questions in four domains, with a key summary question covering each domain. Two individuals independently assessed each meta-analysis.Results: We examined 126 meta-analysis publications in 63 matched pairs. The average quality was low, with fewer than 50% adequate in three of the four domains. Industry-supported meta-analyses less often",
keywords = "meta-analysis, systematic reviews, quality, industry funding, bias",
author = "Lane, {Peter W.} and Higgins, {Julian P. T.} and Betsy Anagnostelis and Judith Anzures-Cabrera and Baker, {Nigel F.} and Cappelleri, {Joseph C.} and Scott Haughie and Sally Hollis and Lewis, {Steff C.} and Patrick Moneuse and Anne Whitehead",
year = "2013",
month = dec
doi = "10.1002/jrsm.1072",
language = "English",
volume = "4",
pages = "342--350",
journal = "Research Synthesis Methods",
issn = "1759-2879",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Ltd",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Methodological quality of meta-analyses

T2 - matched-pairs comparison over time and between industry sponsored and academic-sponsored reports

AU - Lane, Peter W.

AU - Higgins, Julian P. T.

AU - Anagnostelis, Betsy

AU - Anzures-Cabrera, Judith

AU - Baker, Nigel F.

AU - Cappelleri, Joseph C.

AU - Haughie, Scott

AU - Hollis, Sally

AU - Lewis, Steff C.

AU - Moneuse, Patrick

AU - Whitehead, Anne

PY - 2013/12

Y1 - 2013/12

N2 - Context: Meta-analyses are regularly used to inform healthcare decisions. Concerns have been expressed about the quality of meta-analyses and, in particular, about those supported by the pharmaceutical industry.Objective: The objective of this study is to compare the quality of pharmaceutical-industry-supported meta-analyses with academic meta-analyses and of meta-analyses published before and after companies started to disclose their data.Data Sources: We identified industry-supported meta-analyses by searching the Scopus bibliographic database, using author affiliations. We matched each industry-supported meta-analysis with an academic meta-analysis using high-level MeSH terms in PubMed.Study Selection: We included meta-analyses of randomized trials assessing the efficacy or safety of any pharmaceutical intervention in humans, published in 2002–2004 or 2008–2009. Cochrane reviews were excluded. Two individuals independently selected papers, with discrepancies resolved by two furtherindividuals.Assessment: We developed and piloted a quality-assessment tool, consisting of 43 questions in four domains, with a key summary question covering each domain. Two individuals independently assessed each meta-analysis.Results: We examined 126 meta-analysis publications in 63 matched pairs. The average quality was low, with fewer than 50% adequate in three of the four domains. Industry-supported meta-analyses less often

AB - Context: Meta-analyses are regularly used to inform healthcare decisions. Concerns have been expressed about the quality of meta-analyses and, in particular, about those supported by the pharmaceutical industry.Objective: The objective of this study is to compare the quality of pharmaceutical-industry-supported meta-analyses with academic meta-analyses and of meta-analyses published before and after companies started to disclose their data.Data Sources: We identified industry-supported meta-analyses by searching the Scopus bibliographic database, using author affiliations. We matched each industry-supported meta-analysis with an academic meta-analysis using high-level MeSH terms in PubMed.Study Selection: We included meta-analyses of randomized trials assessing the efficacy or safety of any pharmaceutical intervention in humans, published in 2002–2004 or 2008–2009. Cochrane reviews were excluded. Two individuals independently selected papers, with discrepancies resolved by two furtherindividuals.Assessment: We developed and piloted a quality-assessment tool, consisting of 43 questions in four domains, with a key summary question covering each domain. Two individuals independently assessed each meta-analysis.Results: We examined 126 meta-analysis publications in 63 matched pairs. The average quality was low, with fewer than 50% adequate in three of the four domains. Industry-supported meta-analyses less often

KW - meta-analysis

KW - systematic reviews

KW - quality

KW - industry funding

KW - bias

U2 - 10.1002/jrsm.1072

DO - 10.1002/jrsm.1072

M3 - Journal article

VL - 4

SP - 342

EP - 350

JO - Research Synthesis Methods

JF - Research Synthesis Methods

SN - 1759-2879

IS - 4

ER -