THE EFFECT OF ENGLISH-LANGUAGE RESTRICTION ON SYSTEMATIC REVIEW-BASED META-ANALYSES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF EMPIRICAL STUDIES

Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health · Cochrane · +2 more institutions

PubMed
Indexed incrossrefdoajpubmed

Abstract

Objectives

The English language is generally perceived to be the universal language of science. However, the exclusive reliance on English-language studies may not represent all of the evidence. Excluding languages other than English (LOE) may introduce a language bias and lead to erroneous conclusions. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a comprehensive literature search using bibliographic databases and grey literature sources. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they measured the effect of excluding randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported in LOE from systematic review-based meta-analyses (SR/MA) for one or more outcomes.

Results

None of the included studies found major differences between summary treatment effects in English-language restricted meta-analyses and LOE-inclusive meta-analyses. Findings differed about the methodological and reporting quality of trials reported in LOE. The precision of pooled estimates improved with the inclusion of LOE trials.

Citation impact

1,245
total citations
FWCI
25.27
Percentile
100%
References
16
Citations per year

Authors

10

Topics & keywords

Keywords
  • Meta-analysis
  • Systematic review
  • English language
  • MEDLINE
  • Randomized controlled trial
  • Grey literature
  • Publication bias
  • Inclusion (mineral)
UN Sustainable Development Goals
  • Quality Education
No related works found for this paper.