Advice for improving the reproducibility of data extraction in meta-analysis.

data extraction juicr meta-analysis metaDigitise reproducibility shinyDigitise

Journal

Research synthesis methods
ISSN: 1759-2887
Titre abrégé: Res Synth Methods
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101543738

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Nov 2023
Historique:
revised: 26 07 2023
received: 17 03 2023
accepted: 27 07 2023
medline: 8 11 2023
pubmed: 12 8 2023
entrez: 12 8 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Extracting data from studies is the norm in meta-analyses, enabling researchers to generate effect sizes when raw data are otherwise not available. While there has been a general push for increased reproducibility in meta-analysis, the transparency and reproducibility of the data extraction phase is still lagging behind. Unfortunately, there is little guidance of how to make this process more transparent and shareable. To address this, we provide several steps to help increase the reproducibility of data extraction in meta-analysis. We also provide suggestions of R software that can further help with reproducible data policies: the shinyDigitise and juicr packages. Adopting the guiding principles listed here and using the appropriate software will provide a more transparent form of data extraction in meta-analyses.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37571802
doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1663
doi:

Types de publication

Meta-Analysis Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

911-915

Informations de copyright

© 2023 The Authors. Research Synthesis Methods published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Références

Ihle M, Winney IS, Krystalli A, Croucher M. Striving for transparent and credible research: practical guidelines for behavioral ecologists. Behav Ecol. 2017;28:348-354.
Moher D, Altman DG, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J. PRISMA statement. Epidemiology. 2011;22:128.
O'Dea RE, Lagisz M, Jennions MD, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses in ecology and evolutionary biology: a PRISMA extension. Biol Rev. 2021;96:1695-1722. doi:10.1111/brv.12721
Gøtzsche PC, Hróbjartsson A, Marić K, Tendal B. Data extraction errors in meta-analyses that use standardized mean differences. JAMA. 2007;298:430-437. doi:10.1001/jama.298.4.430
Mathes T, Klaßen P, Pieper D. Frequency of data extraction errors and methods to increase data extraction quality: a methodological review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017;17:152. doi:10.1186/s12874-017-0431-4
Wong JS, Bouchard J. Do meta-analyses of intervention/prevention programs in the field of criminology meet the tests of transparency and reproducibility? Trauma Violence Abuse. 2022;24:15248380211073839. doi:10.1177/15248380211073839
Buscemi N, Hartling L, Vandermeer B, Tjosvold L, Klassen TP. Single data extraction generated more errors than double data extraction in systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:697-703. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.11.010
Pick JL, Nakagawa S, Noble DWA. Reproducible, flexible and high-throughput data extraction from primary literature: the metaDigitise r package. Methods Ecol Evol. 2019;10:426-431. doi:10.1111/2041-210X.13118
Miyakawa T. No raw data, no science: another possible source of the reproducibility crisis. Mol Brain. 2020;13:24. doi:10.1186/s13041-020-0552-2
Koricheva J, Gurevitch J. Uses and misuses of meta-analysis in plant ecology. J Ecol. 2014;102:828-844. doi:10.1111/1365-2745.12224
López-Nicolás R, López-López JA, Rubio-Aparicio M, Sánchez-Meca J. A meta-review of transparency and reproducibility-related reporting practices in published meta-analyses on clinical psychological interventions (2000-2020). Behav Res Methods. 2022;54:334-349. doi:10.3758/s13428-021-01644-z
Curtis PS, Mengersen K, Lajeunesse MJ, Rothstein HR, Stewart GB. Extraction and critical appraisal of data. In: Koricheva J, Gurevitch J, Mengersen K, eds. Handbook of Meta-Analysis in Ecology and Evolution. Princeton University Press; 2013:52-60.
Wan X, Wang W, Liu J, Tong T. Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14:135. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-14-135
Lajeunesse MJ. Squeezing data from scientific images using the juicr package for R. R Package Version 0.1. 2021.
Lajeunesse MJ. Facilitating systematic reviews, data extraction and meta-analysis with the metagear package for R. Methods Ecol Evol. 2016;7:323-330.
Nakagawa S, Ivimey-Cook ER, Grainger MJ, et al. Method reporting with initials for transparency (merit) promotes more granularity and accountability for author contributions. Nat Commun. 2023;14:1788. doi:10.1038/s41467-023-37039-1

Auteurs

Edward R Ivimey-Cook (ER)

School of Biodiversity, One Health and Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.

Daniel W A Noble (DWA)

Division of Ecology and Evolution, Research School of Biology, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.

Shinichi Nakagawa (S)

Evolution and Ecology Research Centre, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Marc J Lajeunesse (MJ)

Department of Integrative Biology, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA.

Joel L Pick (JL)

Institute of Ecology and Evolution, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Articles similaires

Selecting optimal software code descriptors-The case of Java.

Yegor Bugayenko, Zamira Kholmatova, Artem Kruglov et al.
1.00
Software Algorithms Programming Languages

Exploring blood-brain barrier passage using atomic weighted vector and machine learning.

Yoan Martínez-López, Paulina Phoobane, Yanaima Jauriga et al.
1.00
Blood-Brain Barrier Machine Learning Humans Support Vector Machine Software
Humans Middle Aged Female Male Surveys and Questionnaires

Classifications MeSH