Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 54, Issue 7 , Pages 655-660 , July 2001

Characteristics of meta-analyses related to acceptance for publication in a medical journal

  • Donna F Stroup

      Affiliations

    • Epidemiology Program Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road, NE, Atlanta, GA 30333, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: 404-639-3683; fax: 404-639-4380.(D.F. Stroup)
    • ,
  • Stephen B Thacker

      Affiliations

    • Epidemiology Program Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road, NE, Atlanta, GA 30333, USA
    • ,
  • Carin M Olson

      Affiliations

    • University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
    • ,
  • Richard M Glass

      Affiliations

    • University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
    • ,
  • Lori Hutwagner

      Affiliations

    • Epidemiology Program Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road, NE, Atlanta, GA 30333, USA

Received 26 January 2000 ,Revised 8 November 2000 ,Accepted 14 November 2000.

References 

  1. Glass RM. Editorial assessment and processing. In:  Iverson C,  Flanagin A,  Fontanarosa PB, et al. editor. American Medical Association manual of style. 9th ed. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Williams; 1998;p. 173–181
  2. Goodman SN, Berlin J, Gletcher SW, Fletcher RH. Manuscript quality before and after peer review and editing at Annals of Internal Medicine. Ann Intern Med. 1994;121:11–21
  3. Kassirer JP. Dissemination of medical information (a journal's role). Ann NY Acad Sci. 1993;703:173–179
  4. Kassirer JP, Campion EW. Peer review (crude and understudied, but indispensable). JAMA. 1994;272:96–97
  5. Garfunkel JM, Ulshen MH, Hamrick HJ, Lawson EE. Effect of institutional prestige on reviewer's recommendations and editorial decision. JAMA. 1994;272:137–138
  6. Gilbert JR, Williams ES, Lundberg GD. Is there gender bias in JAMA's peer review process?. JAMA. 1994;272:139–142
  7. Proceedings of the 3rd International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. Prague, Czech Republic, September 1997. JAMA 1998;280(3):213–302.
  8. Proceedings of the 2nd International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. Proceedings. Chicago, Illinois, September 9–11, 1993. JAMA 1994;272(2):91–173.
  9. Guarding the guardians: research on editorial peer review. Selected proceedings from the First International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. May 10–12, 1989, Chicago, Ill. JAMA 1990;263(10):1317–1441.
  10. Lebeau DL, Seinmann WC, Michael RK. A survey of journal editors regarding the review process for original clinical research. Presented at The International Congress of Biomedical Peer Review and Global Communications, September 17–21, 1997, Prague, Czech Republic.
  11. Kan CC, Lockefeer JH, Overbeke JA. Reasons for rejection of articles for publication in the Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunds (Dutch Journal of Medicine) in 1990. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde. 1991;135:840–845
  12. Thacker SB. Meta-analysis (a quantitative approach to research integration). JAMA. 1988;259:1685–1689
  13. Bero LA, Jadad AR. How consumers and policy makers can use systematic reviews for decision making. Ann Int Med. 1997;127:37–42
  14. Badgett RG, O'Keefe M, Henderson M. Using systematic reviews in clinical education. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126:886–891
  15. Ioannidis JP, Lau J. Pooling research results (benefits and limitations of meta-analysis). J Qual Impr. 1999;25:462–469
  16. McAlister FA, Clark HD, van Walraven C, Straus SE, Lawson FME, Moher D, et al. The medical review article revisited (has the science improved?). Ann Int Med. 1999;131:947–951
  17. Chalmers TC, Lau J. Meta-analytic stimulus for changes in clinical trials. Stat Methods Med Res. 1993;2:161–172
  18. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA. 1995;273:408–412
  19. Jadad AR, McQuay HJ. Meta-analyses to evaluate analgesic interventions (a systematic qualitative review of their methodology). J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:235–243
  20. Sacks HS, Berrier J, Reitman D, Ancona-Berk BA, Chalmers PC. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. N Engl J Med. 1987;316:450–455
  21. Olson CM, Glass RM, Thacker SB, Stroup DF. Ethical issues in studying submissions to a medical journal. JAMA. 1998;280:290–291
  22. Greenland S. Invited commentary (a critical look at some popular meta-analytic methods). Am J Epidemiol. 1994;140:290–296
  23. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. Validation of an index of the quality of review articles. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;11:1271–1278
  24. Oxman AD. Checklists for review articles. BMJ. 1994;309:648–651
  25. Kish L. Survey sampling. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1965;pp. 277–82.
  26. Berry DA. Monitoring accumulating data in a clinical trial. Biometrics. 1989;45:1197–1211
  27. Ware JH, Muller JE, Braunwald E. The futility index (an approach to the cost-effective termination of randomized clinical trials). Am J Med. 1985;78:635–643
  28. Rosenthal R. Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1991;
  29. Harris MC. Integrating research (a guide for literature reviews). Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1989;
  30. Mullen B. Advanced methods in meta-analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1989;
  31. Williams ES, Lundberg GD. Information for readers (The JAMA 1996 editorial peer review audit). JAMA. 1997;277:840
  32. Williams ES, Lundberg GD. Information for readers (The JAMA 1996 editorial peer review audit). JAMA. 1998;279:1116
  33. Jadad AR, Cook DJ, Jones A, Klassen TP, Tugwell P, Moher M, et al. Methodology and reports of systematic reviews and meta-analyses (a comparison of Cochrane reviews with articles published in paper-based journals). JAMA. 1998;280:278–280
  34. Huston P. Cochrane Collaboration helping unravel tangled web woven by international research. Canadian Med Assoc J. 1996;154:1389–1392
  35. Cochrane Collaboration promotes change . Cochrane News. 1998;14:1–5
  36. Ioannidis JP, Cappelleri JC, Lau J. Issues in the comparison of meta-analysis and large trials. JAMA. 1998;279:1089–1093
  37. Blettner M, Sauerbrei B, Scheuchenpflug A, Friedenreich C. Traditional reviews, meta-analyses and pooled analyses in epidemiology. BMJ. 1999;23:1–9

PII: S0895-4356(00)00362-0

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 54, Issue 7 , Pages 655-660 , July 2001

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution