Hostname: page-component-6bb9c88b65-zjgpb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-26T01:11:24.987Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Language bias in neuroscience—is the Tower of Babel located in Germany?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 April 2020

S. Heres ,
S. Wagenpfeil ,
J. Hamann ,
W. Kissling  and
S. Leucht
S. Heres*
Affiliation:
Psychiatrische Klinik und Poliklinik der Technischen Universitaet Muenchen Klinikum rechts der Isar, Ismaningerstr. 22, Munich 81675, Germany
S. Wagenpfeil
Affiliation:
Psychiatrische Klinik und Poliklinik der Technischen Universitaet Muenchen Klinikum rechts der Isar, Ismaningerstr. 22, Munich 81675, Germany
J. Hamann
Affiliation:
Psychiatrische Klinik und Poliklinik der Technischen Universitaet Muenchen Klinikum rechts der Isar, Ismaningerstr. 22, Munich 81675, Germany
W. Kissling
Affiliation:
Psychiatrische Klinik und Poliklinik der Technischen Universitaet Muenchen Klinikum rechts der Isar, Ismaningerstr. 22, Munich 81675, Germany
S. Leucht
Affiliation:
Psychiatrische Klinik und Poliklinik der Technischen Universitaet Muenchen Klinikum rechts der Isar, Ismaningerstr. 22, Munich 81675, Germany
*
*Corresponding author. Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie des Klinikums rechts der Isar Technische, Universitaet Muenchen, Moehlstraße 26, 81675 Muenchen, Germany. s.heres@lrz.tum.de (S. Heres).
Get access

Abstract

In internal medicine German authors tend to publish randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with non-significant findings in German journals, RCTs with significant findings in international journals. In the neurosciences a similar trend was seen but the findings were not statistically significant. The reason for this inconclusive finding might be the low number of RCTs published in German.

Keywords

PsychiatryBias (epidemiology)Randomized controlled trialsPublishingGermanLanguage

Information

Type
Short communication
Information
European Psychiatry , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , June 2004 , pp. 230 - 232
Copyright
Copyright © European Psychiatric Association 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Chalmers, IAdams, MDickersin, KHetherington, JTarnow-Mordi, WMeinert, Cet al. A cohort study of summary reports of controlled trials. JAMA 1990;263:1401–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Egger, MZellweger-Zahner, TSchneider, MJunker, CLengeler, CAntes, G.Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German 1. Lancet 1997;350:326–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egger, MDavey, SGSchneider, MMinder, C.Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997;315:629–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gregoire, GDerderian, FLe Lorier, J.Selecting the language of the publications included in a meta-analysis: is there a Tower of Babel bias? J Clin Epidemiol 1995;48:159–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jadad, ARMoore, RACarroll, DJenkinson, CReynolds, DJGavaghan, DJet al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996;17:1–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Juni, PHolenstein, FSterne, JBartlett, CEgger, M.Direction and impact of language bias in meta-analyses of controlled trials: empirical study. Int J Epidemiol 2002;31:115–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McAuley, LPham, BTugwell, PMoher, D.Does the inclusion of grey literature influence estimates of intervention effectiveness reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 2000;356:1228–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moher, DFortin, PJadad, ARJuni, PKlassen, TLe Lorier, Jet al. Completeness of reporting of trials published in languages other than English: implications for conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. Lancet 1996;347:363–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moher, DPham, B JonesA, Cook, DJJadad, ARMoher, Met al. Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 1998;352:609–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moher, DPham, BKlassen, TPSchulz, KFBerlin, JAJadad, ARet al. What contributions do languages other than English make on the results of meta-analyses? J Clin Epidemiol 2000;53:964–72.Google ScholarPubMed
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.