aSummary effect size is not shown owing to concern
about publication bias for this outcome.
Such a strategy mitigates concern
about publication bias because the decision to publish was unrelated to the findings on smoking status and cancer outcome.
Not exact matches
But JNRBM meets two important needs in science reporting: the need to combat the positive spin known as
publication bias and the need to make other scientists feel better
about themselves.
I'm talking
about Michael Winerip who, to the best of my knowledge, is the single worst education reporter in America, infamous for
biased hatchet jobs on NCLB, Bloomberg and Klein's reforms, and anything else associated with genuine reform (if anyone is aware of someone worse at a major
publication, please let me know — maybe I'll start a Reporter Hall of Shame...)
«But its critics claim that InsideClimate News is essentially a mouthpiece run by a public - relations consultancy that gets its funding almost exclusively from groups with an environmental agenda... The little that is known
about InsideClimate News raises questions
about conflicts of interest as well as
about the
publication's ability, and proclivity, to report fairly and without
bias.»
I also raised concerns
about bias; here we apparently see Tom Karl's thumb on the scale in terms of the methodologies and procedures used in this
publication.
I wouldn't doubt that there would be influences and
biases in the process by which journal articles are selected for
publication — my doubt is when overly broad or categorical statements are made
about the vast «asymmetry.»