Skip to main content

Table 2 Proportion of omitted RCTs for each reason for omission

From: Reasons for missing evidence in rehabilitation meta-analyses: a cross-sectional meta-research study

Reason for omission

Omitted RCTs

Corresponding IMAs$

N

%

N*

%

Inadequate planning

122

17%

40

40%

Selective reporting

24

3,3%

15

15%

Incomplete reporting

60

8,4%

38

38%

Unable to distinguish between selective reporting and inadequate planning

282

39,3%

68

68%

Justified to be not included

108

15,1%

43

43%

Other situations

37

5,2%

16

16%

Not assessed – Language

20

2,8%

8

8%

Not assessed – Not found and not possible to judge

64

8,9%

22

22%

TOTAL

717

100%

100

 
  1. *number of meta-analyses with at least one omitted study for each reason for omission; $ The total number exceeds 100% because some meta-analyses omitted studies due to more than one reason
  2. Legend: IMAs Index meta-analyses, N Number, RCTs Randomized controlled trials