Objectives: Publication bias is widely appreciated, but considerable time and effort are needed to locate and obtain data from unpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs), those published in non-English language journals or those reported in the gray literature; for this publication, we will call this collection of trials the “gray+ literature.” However, excluding such trials from systematic reviews could introduce bias and give rise to misleading conclusions. Methods: We aimed to explore and quantify the impact of inclusion of gray+ literature on the results of all completed individual patient data (IPD) reviews coordinated by our group (13 meta-analyses). For each IPD review, results were calculated for RCTs fully published in English language journals and RCTs fully published in English language journals and the gray+ literature. Results: The IPD meta-analyses based only on RCTs that were fully published in English language journals tended to give more favorable results than those that included RCTs from the gray+ literature. Although in most cases the addition of gray+ data gave less encouraging results, moving the estimated treatment effect toward a null result, the direction of effect was not always predictable. Conclusions: We recommend that all systematic reviews should at least attempt to identify trials reported in the gray+thinsp;literature and, where possible, obtain data from them.
[1]
S. Burdett,et al.
Postoperative radiotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data from nine randomised controlled trials
,
1998,
The Lancet.
[2]
P. Easterbrook,et al.
Publication bias in clinical research
,
1991,
The Lancet.
[3]
D. Alberts,et al.
Chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer: an overview of randomised clinical trials. Advanced Ovarian Cancer Trialists Group.
,
1991,
BMJ.
[4]
R. Peto,et al.
Overview of randomised trials of diuretics in pregnancy.
,
1985,
British medical journal.
[5]
O. Brodin,et al.
Chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis using updated data on individual patients from 52 randomised clinical trials
,
1995
.
[6]
M. Parmar,et al.
Preoperative radiotherapy in esophageal carcinoma: a meta-analysis using individual patient data (Oesophageal Cancer Collaborative Group).
,
1998,
International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.
[7]
D. Crowther.
Adjuvant chemotherapy for localised resectable soft-tissue sarcoma of adults: meta-analysis of individual data
,
1997,
The Lancet.