TY  - JOUR
A1  - Niemeyer, Helen
A1  - Musch, Jochen
A1  - Pietrowsky, Reinhard
T1  - Publication Bias in meta-analyses of the efficacy of psychotherapeutic interventions for depression
JF  - Journal of consulting and clinical psychology
N2  - Objective: The aim of this study was to assess whether systematic reviews investigating psychotherapeutic interventions for depression are affected by publication bias. Only homogeneous data sets were included, as heterogeneous data sets can distort statistical tests of publication bias. Method: We applied Begg and Mazumdar's adjusted rank correlation test, Egger's regression analysis, and the trim and fill procedure to assess the presence and magnitude of publication bias in all homogeneous data sets of systematic reviews published up to September 2010. Results: Thirty-one data sets reported in 19 meta-analyses fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Significant bias was detected in 5 (16.13%; rank correlation test) and 6 (19.35%; Egger's regression analysis) of these data sets. Applying the trim and fill procedure to amend presumably missing studies rarely changed the assessment of the efficacy of therapeutic interventions, with 2 exceptions. In 1 data set psychotherapy was no longer found to be significantly more efficacious than pharmacotherapy in reducing dropout at posttreatment when publication bias was taken into account. In the 2nd data set, after correcting for publication bias, there was no longer evidence that depressed patients without comorbid personality disorder profited more from psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy than patients with comorbid personality disorder. Conclusions: The results suggest that taken together, psychotherapy research for depression is only marginally affected by the selective reporting of positive outcomes. With 2 notable exceptions, correcting for publication bias did not change the evaluation of the efficacy of psychotherapeutic interventions.
KW  - depression
KW  - publication bias
KW  - meta-analysis
KW  - psychotherapy research
Y1  - 2013
U6  - https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031152
SN  - 0022-006X
VL  - 81
IS  - 1
SP  - 58
EP  - 74
PB  - American Psychological Association
CY  - Washington
ER  - 
TY  - JOUR
A1  - Asendorpf, Jens B.
A1  - Conner, Mark
A1  - De Fruyt, Filip
A1  - De Houwer, Jan
A1  - Denissen, Jaap J. A.
A1  - Fiedler, Klaus
A1  - Fiedler, Susann
A1  - Funder, David C.
A1  - Kliegl, Reinhold
A1  - Nosek, Brian A.
A1  - Perugini, Marco
A1  - Roberts, Brent W.
A1  - Schmitt, Manfred
A1  - vanAken, Marcel A. G.
A1  - Weber, Hannelore
A1  - Wicherts, Jelte M.
T1  - Recommendations for increasing replicability in psychology
JF  - European journal of personality
N2  - Replicability of findings is at the heart of any empirical science. The aim of this article is to move the current replicability debate in psychology towards concrete recommendations for improvement. We focus on research practices but also offer guidelines for reviewers, editors, journal management, teachers, granting institutions, and university promotion committees, highlighting some of the emerging and existing practical solutions that can facilitate implementation of these recommendations. The challenges for improving replicability in psychological science are systemic. Improvement can occur only if changes are made at many levels of practice, evaluation, and reward.
KW  - replicability
KW  - confirmation bias
KW  - publication bias
KW  - generalizability
KW  - research transparency
Y1  - 2013
U6  - https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1919
SN  - 0890-2070
VL  - 27
IS  - 2
SP  - 108
EP  - 119
PB  - Wiley-Blackwell
CY  - Hoboken
ER  -