Topic summary

Publication bias detection and its low power — does this still hold?

Evidence › Meta-analyses publication bias risk of bias meta-analysis heterogeneity Solved

This is a generated summary. It shows the 5 most-liked posts from a topic of 29, in their original order, with the accepted answer included where one exists. It is a reading aid and it will miss nuance — the full topic is the record.

d.bramleyTL3Regular Solution27 Dec 2025#4

a.krastev, post #3: Subgroup analysis: sometimes a meta-analysis reports separate pooled estimates for different subgroups (e.g., by baseline body mass index or by trial duration). Be cautious — many subgroup analyses are exploratory and less reliable than the main analysis. Go to post

post #3 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.

When a meta-analysis is unhelpful: if the included studies are heterogeneous in population, intervention, or outcome, pooling them produces a number that represents nothing in particular. Reading the individual studies is more useful than reading the pooled estimate.

21 likes in reply to #3 7mo

an.kirchnerTL2 Moderator16 Jan 2026 · edited#7

Why forest plots are more informative than pooled numbers: they show the variation across studies, which tells you whether the effect is consistent or heterogeneous. A narrow confidence interval around a meaningless centre is less useful than a wider interval that shows real differences.

29 likes 6mo

s.beaulieuTL2 Moderator3 Mar 2026#15

Publication bias: what did not get published? Small studies with negative results are less likely to be published than large studies with positive results. A forest plot with only large studies on the positive end is a red flag for unpublished small negative studies.

25 likes 5mo

l.parkinsonTL2Member16 Apr 2026#24

Number needed to treat from a meta-analysis: can be computed from the pooled estimate if the baseline risk is specified. More interpretable than pooled relative effects.

23 likes 3mo

NLoughranTL3Regular5 May 2026#28

Thank you for the correction. I have edited my earlier post with a note rather than silently, so the thread still makes sense to read. The error was mine and it was the kind that comes from remembering a figure instead of looking it up.

31 likes 3mo

Read the full topic (29 posts)

This topic was referenced in

Pooling trials with different estimandsEvidence › Meta-analyses · 132 replies
Reading a meta-analysis you disagree with, fairlyEvidence › Meta-analyses · 13 replies

Suggested topics

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
What pooling buys you and what it destroys Evidence › Meta-analyses publication bias risk of bias meta-analysis heterogeneity Solved The question in the title: What pooling buys you and what it destroys I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. Comparing SURMOUNT-2 ( Lancet , 2023) with LEADER ( N Engl J Med ,…	+74	83	6.6k	8mo
Heterogeneity as information rather than as a nuisance Evidence › Meta-analyses heterogeneity risk of bias meta-analysis effect size Posting this under the heading it deserves: Heterogeneity as information rather than as a nuisance Everything below is what sits behind that. Session topic: SCALE ( N Engl J Med , 2015). Please read it before…	+88	95	1.2k	6mo
When a network meta-analysis is defensible and when it is not Evidence › Meta-analyses effect size heterogeneity publication bias Solved When a network meta-analysis is defensible and when it is not I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Comparing SUSTAIN 6 ( N Engl J Med , 2016) with LEADER (…		2	27k	4h
Prediction intervals and why they are more honest than confidence intervals Evidence › Meta-analyses heterogeneity risk of bias effect size publication bias Solved Closed Posting this under the heading it deserves: Prediction intervals and why they are more honest than confidence intervals Everything below is what sits behind that. Comparing SURMOUNT-4 ( JAMA , 2024) with FLOW…	+21	25	46k	4mo
Publication bias detection and its low power Evidence › Meta-analyses heterogeneity publication bias effect size On the subject in the title: Publication bias detection and its low power Working notes rather than a conclusion. I have seen SURMOUNT-1 ( N Engl J Med , 2022) cited in support of a claim I do not think it…		2	3.2k	1d

Related topics — sharing the tags publication bias, risk of bias, meta-analysis

Topic	Participants	Replies	Views	Activity
Tracking a preprint to publication: a worked example — the long version Evidence › Preprints risk of bias preprint effect size Posting this under the heading it deserves: Tracking a preprint to publication: a worked example — the long version Everything below is what sits behind that. Comparing STEP 8 ( JAMA , 2022) with STEP 2 (…	+38	47	560	22mo
Why a preprint's supplementary material is often the best part Evidence › Preprints needs a source risk of bias preprint effect size Why a preprint's supplementary material is often the best part I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Session topic: SUSTAIN 6 ( N Engl J Med , 2016). Please…	+38	42	863	22mo
Measurement error in home scales, with a worked standard deviation Research Methods › Statistics effect size heterogeneity number needed to treat confounding Solved Wiki Measurement error in home scales, with a worked standard deviation Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Comparing SURPASS-4 ( Lancet , 2021) with STEP 1 ( N Engl…	+26	31	4.3k	4mo
How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work Evidence › Preprints risk of bias effect size preprint needs a source How this community labels and discusses unrefereed work — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. I have seen SCALE ( N Engl J Med , 2015) cited in support of a…	+112	119	1.3k	2y
The "under review" status pill and when a moderator applies it Evidence › Preprints risk of bias effect size preprint Posting this under the heading it deserves: The "under review" status pill and when a moderator applies it Everything below is what sits behind that. Session topic: SURMOUNT-4 ( JAMA , 2024). Please read it…	+96	119	17k	3mo