S6E63: Exploring Publication Bias

This podcast is available on iTunes, iHeartRadio, Spotify, and Google Play

Articles contain affiliate links. For more information on affiliate links, click here.

Who You’ll Hear

Kati Kleber, MSN RN – Nurse educator, former cardiac med-surg/stepdown and neurocritical care nurse, author, and speaker.

Julie Birky, MSW MA LCSW – Clinical social worker, teacher of sociology, practicing therapy clinician

What You’ll Learn

• Evidence based practice
• What influnces research?
• Publication bias

Exploring Publication Bias Show Notes

• Nursing school focuses on little research
  • Wasn’t until Master that you really learn what to look for and what is good research
  • Assumed all evidence based practice is done the same
    • Every hosptial does it differently
    • All research is not the same
• What infulences research?
  • Has to be accepted to be published
  • First author came up to study the subject
  • Impact factor
• Publication bias
  • Reasearch is done based on needs
  • What subject can get me published?
  • Journals more likely to accept research where findings match the hypothisis
    • Positive results
    • Journals are filled with more positve results
  • This lays groundwork for bias
    • See more of something we think that is representaive of the population
  • We have to look for the big picture in research
  • Publication bias results from the selective publication of studies based on the direction and magnitude of their results-studies without statistical significance (negative studies) are less likely to be published.
  • We need those negative results also
• The file drawer problem
  • suggests that results not supporting the hypotheses of researchers often go no further than the researchers’ file drawers, leading to a bias in published research
• P-hacking
  • Doing the same tests over and over until you eventually hit the desired results by chance.
  • P-hacking is typically done through manipulation of “researcher degrees of freedom,” or the decisions made by the investigator.
  • There is no indication that p-hacking was used
• HARKing
  • HARKing is defined as presenting a post hoc hypothesis in one’s research report as if it were, in fact, an a pre hypotheses.
• Citation Bias
  • The more times your article has been cited, the more value we place on it
  • We cite positive results more often
  • Feeding on itself problem
• How are we combating publication bias?
  • Publication bias may be reduced by journals publishing high-quality studies regardless of novelty or unexciting results, and by publishing protocols or full-study data sets
  • There are grassroots orginizations publishing high quality studies regarless of results

More Resources for Exploring Publication Bias

• Email list sign up
• The Extent and Consequences of P-Hacking in Science 
• Stat Experts Plead: Just Say No to P-Hacking
• HARKing, Cherry-Picking, P-Hacking, Fishing Expeditions, and Data Dredging and Mining as Questionable Research Practices
• Unintended Consequences: The Perils of Publication and Citation Bias
• The radio station Julie is featured on with her “mental health minute”