1 we explain what happens once a manuscript has been
accepted for publication.
2 blication, author-produced version of a manuscript
accepted for publication in Annals of Internal Medicine.
3 Accounting for publication bias reduced the odds ratios for the various
4 ut based on statistical techniques that evaluate and
adjust for publication bias, we question whether depletion is a real
5 e obtained through random effect meta-analyses and
adjusted for publication bias.
6 Findings
adjusted for publication bias were similar.
7 After
adjustment for publication bias, the overall relative risk was reduced t
8 subject matter experts and were also reviewed and
approved for publication by the AHA Science Advisory and Coordinating
9 contrasting the results in order to select a final
assembly for publication.
10 ration of results in web reports that are readily
available for publication.
11 nd heterogeneity was addressed with I(2) index,
controlling for publication bias and quality of study.
12 Tweedie's 'trim and fill' were used to examine and
correct for publication bias.
13 We also tested and
corrected for publication bias by 3 funnel plot-based methods.
14 Results, with
correction for publication bias, revealed a significant and positive rel
15 generated random-effects models for analysis and
evaluated for publication bias.
16 We also evaluated heterogeneity among studies and
evidence for publication bias.
17 ality, including heterogeneity between studies and
evidence for publication bias.
18 = 18.27, P = .16), and the funnel plot provided no
evidence for publication bias.
19 ation files offline and to generate high-resolution
figures for publication.
20 e visual context, and to download data, results, and
images for publication.
21 tand what manipulations are appropriate in preparing
images for publication, what manipulations must be disclosed in the
22 The Minimum
Information for Publication of Quantitative Real-Time PCR Experiments (MI
23 eferred Items for SRs and Meta-Analyses should be
mandatory for publication.
24 material and in determining priority of submitted
material for publication.
25 d was in mean deviation for sensitivity, which was
observed for publication timing, where studies published first on a to
26 Potential for publication bias, and evaluated health IT systems and out
27 Potential for publication bias, insufficient reporting of harms, and po
28 The
potential for publication bias was explored by using funnel plots, Begg
29 s can share datasets and automate data depository
processes for publication purposes.
30 The adjusted hazard
ratio for publication was 1.79 (95% confidence interval, 1.20-2.67)
31 zes otherwise-scattered scripts and creates dynamic
reports for publication and sharing.
32 sider requiring these key data when reviewing these
reports for publication.
33 More experimental data are now
required for publication, and the average time required for graduate s
34 reproducible and statistically significant results
required for publication quality data.
35 ook for when Annals is considering rapid and living
reviews for publication.
36 have used this guideline worldwide to prepare their
reviews for publication.
37 Mixed evidence was
seen for publication bias, but analyses by using the Duval and Twe
38 This article has not received
sponsorship for publication.
39 ign, conduct, and reporting of exploratory clinical
studies for publication.
40 recommendations and prevention pathway prior to
submission for publication.
41 nanobeads used in previous work (Donolato et al.,
submitted for publication), where a limit of detection of 10pM was obta
42 cal knowledge to appraise critically the articles
submitted for publication.
43 g withdrawn so that a corrected manuscript can be
submitted for publication.
44 l responsibility for the content of the documents
submitted for publication, each reviewer comment will be discussed, and
45 0 manuscripts over the past 22 months for their
suitability for publication in our journal.
46 piPipes can also produce figures and tables
suitable for publication.
47 few mortality studies were identified to meaningfully
test for publication bias.
48 ots using the SMD in combination with the SE are
unsuitable for publication bias assessments and can lead to false-positi
49 t WHO's response during the epidemic, and have been
updated for publication.
50 ale was used for study quality, and the Egger test was
used for publication bias.