Contemporary Clinical Trials Methods for assessing inverse publication bias of adverse events

3886 

Contributed Abstract 

Poster 

Fahad Al Amer (1)

(1) N/A, N/A

Fahad Al Amer  
N/A

Fahad Al Amer  
N/A

In medical research, publication bias (PB) poses great challenges to the conclusions from systematic reviews and meta-analyses used in evidence-based medicine. The majority of efforts in research related to classic PB have focused on examining the potential suppression of studies reporting effects close to the null or statistically nonsignificant results. Such suppression is common, particularly when the study outcome concerns the effectiveness of a new intervention. On the other hand, attention has recently been drawn to the so-called inverse publication bias (IPB) within the evidence synthesis community. It can occur when assessing adverse events because researchers may favor evidence showing a similar safety profile regarding an adverse event between a new intervention and a control group. In comparison to the classic PB, IPB is much less recognized in the current literature, and methods designed for classic PB may be inaccurately applied to address IPB, potentially leading to entirely incorrect conclusions. This article aims to provide a collection of accessible methods to assess IPB for adverse events. Specifically, we discuss the relevance and differences between classic PB a

Adverse event|inverse publication bias|publication bias|funnel plot|regression test|