Factbites
 Where results make sense
About us   |   Why use us?   |   Reviews   |   PR   |   Contact us  

Topic: Positive outcome bias


  
  Positive outcome bias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There are two cognitive biases which might be called the positive outcome bias:
Publication bias -- the tendency for researchers to publish research which had a positive outcome.
Positive outcome bias (prediction) -- a bias in prediction in which people overestimate the probability of good things happening to them.
en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Positive_outcome_bias   (142 words)

  
 Bias and Research Abstracts Submitted to a Scientific Meeting...[Fulltext, July 15 JAMA. 1998;280:254-257] (c) AMA 1998
Conclusions.—Positive-outcome bias was evident when studies were submitted for consideration and was amplified in the selection of abstracts for both presentation and publication, neither of which was strongly related to study design or quality.
Positive-outcome (also known as "publication") bias refers to the fact that research with positive outcomes is much more likely to be published than that with negative outcomes.[1-4] Presentation of results in abstracts at scientific meetings is the first and often only publication for most biomedical research studies.[
Positive studies were preferentially accepted during both the acceptance and publication decisions (P=.03), which is illustrated in the funnel plots (Figure).
www.ama-assn.org /public/peer/7_15_98/jpv71042.htm   (2586 words)

  
 Outcome knowledge, regret, and omission bias
Thus, the bias toward omission (not vaccinating) is greater when potential regret is present, and potential regret is greater when knowledge of outcomes is expected.
Baron and Ritov (1994) found that acts leading to a worse outcome than the alternative outcome were judged as worse than omissions that lead to the worse of the two outcomes, regardless of whether these outcomes were gains or losses relative to the status-quo.
People think that a bad outcome of an act is particularly bad if it could have been avoided by doing nothing, but they are less inclined to think that a bad outcome of an omission is particularly bad because it could have been avoided through some action.
www.sas.upenn.edu /~baron/ocreg.html   (6791 words)

  
 Bias publikasi - Wikipédia
Bias publikasi, ogé disebut bias hasil positif (Ing.
positive outcome bias), nyaéta kacondongan panalungtik pikeun mublikasikeun percobaan nu mibanda hasil positif (manggihan lumangsungna hiji hal), sarta dina sisi séjén teu mublikasikeun percobaan nu hasilna négatif (manggihan teu lumangsungna hiji hal).
As such, this may distort meta-analysis of large numbers of studies.
su.wikipedia.org /wiki/Bias_publikasi   (146 words)

  
 Stats: Conflict of interest
The drugs compared in the studies were classified as new or as control drugs and the outcome of the trial as positive or not positive.
Positive bias was judged to have occurred if the reference list contained a higher proportion of references with a positive outcome for that drug than among all the articles assumed to have been available to the authors (those published more than two years earlier than the index article).
Among the 111 articles analysed bias was not possible in the references of 35 (because all the references gave the same outcome); 10 had a neutral selection of references, 22 a negative selection, and 44 a positive selection--a significant positive bias.
www.cmh.edu /stats/journal/conflict.asp   (1536 words)

  
 Outcome bias in decision evaluation
When subjects were told the outcome and asked what probability other subjects who did not know the outcome (or they themselves if they did not know it) would give, they gave higher probabilities than those given by actual other subjects not told the outcome (or told that some other outcome had occurred).
Mitchell and Kalb argued that the effect of outcome on probability did not explain the effect on responsibility judgment: the correlation between judged probability and judged responsibility, with outcome held constant, was nonsignificant across subjects.
The outcome bias shown by the latter four was 0.43, 0.29, 1.43, and 0.71, respectively.
www.sas.upenn.edu /~baron/judg.html   (10067 words)

  
 International Congress of Biomedical Peer Review   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-22)
Design: Abstracts of all research submitted for consideration to a national research meeting in emergency medicine (n=493) were classified and rated by a minimum of 2 blinded reviewers, study-effect size calculated for each, and MEDLINE search with 5-year follow-up (and author questionnaire) was conducted to determine publication as a full manuscript in a peer-reviewed journal.
Funnel plots of effect sizes showed the classic distribution of positive-outcome ("publication") bias, favoring studies with positive effects regardless of methodologic rigor.
Positive-outcome bias was evident when studies are first submitted for consideration to the meeting, and was amplified both in the selection of abstracts for presentation and in selection for publication as a full manuscript in a journal, neither of which was strongly related to study design or quality or publishing journal prestige.
www.ama-assn.org /public/peer/pome.htm   (377 words)

  
 publication bias   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-22)
Publication bias occurs because of the greater likelihood that studies which show positive results will be published than those which do not.
Publication bias occurs with all trials where positive results may be beneficial to the researcher; the sponsor; the publisher; or the publication in which they appear.
Publication bias is common where researchers fund, research, and publish themselves; this is common with alternative medicine and is where most of the "evidence" that they work comes from.
www.skeptics.org.uk /explanation.php?dir=articles/explanations&article=publication_bias.php   (212 words)

  
 Positive outcome bias -- Facts, Info, and Encyclopedia article   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-22)
There are two (additional info and facts about cognitive bias) cognitive biases which might be called the positive outcome bias:
(additional info and facts about Publication bias) Publication bias -- the tendency for researchers to publish (Systematic investigation to establish facts) research which had a positive outcome.
(additional info and facts about Positive outcome bias (prediction)) Positive outcome bias (prediction) -- a bias in (A statement made about the future) prediction in which people overestimate the probability of good things happening to them.
www.absoluteastronomy.com /encyclopedia/p/po/positive_outcome_bias.htm   (127 words)

  
 Nat' Academies Press, Damp Indoor Spaces and Health (2004)
Publication Bias An important aspect of the quality of a review is the extent to which all appropriate information is considered and serious omissions or inappropriate exclusions of evidence are avoided.
Analytic Bias Analytic bias is a systematic error in the estimate of association; for example, between an exposure and an adverse event.
Rather, consistency of a positive association means that the results of most studies are positive and that the differences in measured effects are within the range expected on the basis of all types of error, including sampling, selection bias, misclassification, confounding, and differences in exposure.
www.nap.edu /books/0309091934/html/17.html   (4421 words)

  
 Nat' Academies Press, Clearing the Air: Asthma and Indoor Air Exposures (2000)
Analytic Bias Analytic bias is a systematic error in the estimate of associa- tion between the exposure and the adverse event.
Confounding bias addressed in greater detail below occurs when the exposure-adverse event association is biased as a result of a third factor that is both capable of causing the adverse event and is statistically associated with the exposure itself.
Rather, consistency of a positive association was taken to mean that the results of most studies were positive and that the differ- ences in measured effects were within the range expected on the basis of all types of error including sampling, selection bias, misclassification, confounding, and differences in actual exposure levels.
www.nap.edu /books/0309064961/html/39.html   (6755 words)

  
 Bias   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-22)
A bias is a prejudice in a general or specific sense, usually in the sense for having a predilection to one particular view or ideology.
A bias could for example lead one to accept or non-accept the truth of a claim, not because of the strength of the claim itself, but because it does or does not correspond to one's own preconceived ideas.
Trait ascription bias is the tendency for people to view themselves as relatively variable in terms of personality, behavior and mood while viewing others as much more predictable in their personal traits across different situations.
www.jahsonic.com /Bias.html   (835 words)

  
 NGC - NGC Summary
The gathering of outcome assessment data and basing clinical decisions on the data is the basis of the evidenced based outcome assessment practice.
Failure to exhibit a positive outcome assessment on all selected measures does not by itself indicate failure in treatment, particularly when doctor measured outcome assessment measures continue to exhibit a positive outcome assessment measure, while paper driven measures are equivocal.
Examiner measured outcome assessment are used for the direct qualitative and/or quantitative assessment of the biomechanical/physiological components of the patient's condition.
guideline.gov /summary/summary.aspx?doc_id=2786&nbr=2012&...   (2460 words)

  
 [No title]
When harmful outcomes are rare, it would take a lot longer and/or require too many resources to acquire the number of subjects required to show significant trends.
When the outcome of interest is rare in the population from which the sample is drawn the OR closely approximates the RR.
In a "positive" study (the investigators report an increased risk of adverse outcome from an exposure) the lower end of the CI shows the minimum estimate of the RR or OR.
www.stanford.edu /group/em/documents/Tutorials/Tutorial5.html   (1504 words)

  
 [No title]   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-22)
An indirect estimate of publication bias is possible by looking at the percentage of studies that resulted in significant differences.
Then the outcome impact of blind penetration can be estimated by comparing those patients who are truly blind with those who are not.
To address concerns that outcome may tip off the condition, clinicians and patients could make their guesses early in the study before treatment effects take hold (e.g., within the first 2 weeks).
journals.apa.org /prevention/volume5/pre0050025c.html   (5675 words)

  
 Bias -- Delgado-Rodríguez and Llorca 58 (8): 635 -- Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
Bias due to misclassification in the estimation of relative risk.
Bias in using family history as a risk factor in case-control studies of disease.
Bias due to non-differential misclassification of polytomous confounders.
jech.bmjjournals.com /cgi/content/full/58/8/635   (3083 words)

  
 Method Sylabus
Publication bias (also referred to as positive-outcome bias) is the tendency to publish research with "positive" or statistically significant results.
(Positive means finding a significant result irrespective of whether it is positive in some wider sense.) Publication bias may occur for many reasons.
Regarding a presentation on publication bias, it is likely that you don’t find that much written in economics (although you will find something).
www.modares.ac.ir /hum/hoseinie/_private/Methodsyl.htm   (1878 words)

  
 CJEM | JCMU 2005; 7(3):176-211 :: EM Advances   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-22)
The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge.
The primary outcome was the mean ED length-of-stay (LOS) per 8hr interval for non-low acuity patients; secondary outcome was LOS for all patients.
Positive outcome bias was absent: abstracts reporting positive results were not more likely to be published than those with negative/neutral results.
www.caep.ca /004.cjem-jcmu/004-00.cjem/vol-7.2005/v73.176-211.abstracts.htm   (4815 words)

  
 JAMA -- Abstract: Positive-Outcome Bias and Other Limitations in the Outcome of Research Abstracts Submitted to a ...
JAMA -- Abstract: Positive-Outcome Bias and Other Limitations in the Outcome of Research Abstracts Submitted to a Scientific Meeting, July 15, 1998, Callaham et al.
Research outcomes in British gastroenterology: an audit of the subsequent full publication of abstracts presented at the British Society of Gastroenterology
Publication Bias Is a Scientific Problem with Adverse Ethical Outcomes: The Case for a Section for Null Results
jama.ama-assn.org /cgi/content/abstract/280/3/254   (501 words)

  
 Hacknot - XP and ESP - The Truth is Out There!
When it is pointed out to PSI researchers who claim to have successfully demonstrated ESP, that hundreds of non-PSI researchers have tried to replicate their results and failed, they sometimes attribute this to the fact that the attitude of both experimenter and subject can influence the results.
This is one of the many "outs" PSI researchers have developed that enable them to attribute negative results to extraneous causes, and preserve only the data that is favorable to their preferred hypotheses.
But an awareness of confirmation bias, positive outcome bias and their contribution to the development of false beliefs should encourage us to seek evidence beyond that provided by popular media and effusive testimonial.
www.hacknot.info /hacknot/action/showEntry?eid=53   (1436 words)

  
 positive-outcome bias, publication bias
Positive-outcome (or "publication") bias is the tendency to publish research with a positive outcome more frequently than research with a negative outcome.
Positive-outcome bias also refers to the tendency of the media to publish medical study stories with positive outcomes much more frequently than such stories with negative outcomes.
Media bias may be due to scientific journal bias, but the latter seems to be due mainly to researchers not submitting negative outcome studies for publication (the file-drawer effect), rather than to bias on the part of publication or peer review editors.
www.skepdic.com /posoutbias.html   (260 words)

  
 Wishful thinking
Studies have consistently shown that, holding all else equal, subjects will predict positive outcomes to be more likely than negative outcomes.
In addition to being a cognitive bias and a poor way of making decisions, wishful thinking can also be a specific logical fallacy in an argument occurring when it is assumed that because we wish something was true or false then it is actually is true or false.
Self-serving bias may be a directly resulting cognitive bias; see the list of cognitive biases for more.
www.brainyencyclopedia.com /encyclopedia/w/wi/wishful_thinking.html   (306 words)

  
 Publication Bias Is a Scientific Problem with Adverse Ethical Outcomes: The Case for a Section for Null Results -- ...
Publication Bias Is a Scientific Problem with Adverse Ethical Outcomes: The Case for a Section for Null Results -- Shields 9 (8): 771 -- Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention
Publication bias is a well-known phenomenon that affects cancer epidemiology,
Stern J. M., Simes R. Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects.
cebp.aacrjournals.org /cgi/content/full/9/8/771   (1620 words)

  
 Research outcomes in British gastroenterology: an audit of the subsequent full publication of abstracts presented at ...
Research outcomes in British gastroenterology: an audit of the subsequent full publication of abstracts presented at the British Society of Gastroenterology -- SANDERS et al.
There have been no studies evaluating the outcome of abstracts presented at gastroenterology meetings.
Positive outcome bias and other limitations in the outcome of research abstracts submitted to a scientific meeting.
gut.bmjjournals.com /cgi/content/full/49/1/154a   (623 words)

  
 Stats: Publication Bias references
Publication bias is the tendency for negative research to get published less frequently, less prominently, or more slowly, and the tendency for positive research to get published more than one time.
The risk of bias from omitted research: Evidence must be independently sought and free of economic interests.
Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects.
www.cmh.edu /stats/weblog2004/PublicationBias1.asp   (2463 words)

  
 AMA Recommends That DHHS Establish a Registry for All U.S. Clinical Trials
The new registry would ensure that trials with negative as well as positive results are publicly available, by providing every clinical trial with a unique identification and ensuring publication or placement on an electronic database of all results from registered trials.
There may be outcome bias resulting from the use of unreliable methods and inadequate sample size or comparison groups.
Investigators and authors are reluctant to submit studies unless the results are positive or significant, believing that journals will not publish them.
www.prnewswire.com /cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/06-15-2004/0002193951&EDATE=   (366 words)

  
 Commentary: Toward systematic reviews in epidemiology -- Bracken 30 (5): 954 -- International Journal of Epidemiology
positive study to be the absence of an a priori hypothesis as
False positive outcomes and design characteristics in occupational cancer epidemiology studies.
Callaham M, Wears RL, Weber EJ, Barton C, Young G. Positive outcome bias and other limitations in the outcome of research abstracts submitted to a scientific meeting.
ije.oxfordjournals.org /cgi/content/full/30/5/954   (2012 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)

Factbites
  About us   |   Why use us?   |   Reviews   |   Press   |   Contact us  
Copyright © 2005-2007 www.factbites.com Usage implies agreement with terms.