This increased transparency has already boosted the profile, reproducibility and utility of the SOAPdenovo2 study, with groups using all of the detailed reviews, source code and supplementary materials to carry out post-publication assessment and review of the study, producing blogs and a wiki parsing and community annotating the 40,000 lines of code in the application [ 7].
A nonparametric rank test was conducted to examine the difference between low- and high-quality publications (assessment scores ≤ 4 versus > 4).
For non-AMNOG documents, the overall rate was 75% for methods items (journal publications: 67%, European public assessment reports: 54%, registry reports: 46%); complete reporting of results items was noticeably poorer (overall rate: 52%, journal publications: 41%, European public assessment reports 29%, registry reports: 21%).
Funnel plot for publication bias assessment is illustrated in Supplementary Figure S1.
In this meta-analysis, the statistical analysis and publication bias assessment were done as described in Adell et al. [ 11].
Both tests used for publication bias assessment were not significant for Overweight, Obesity nor Severe obesity groups.
In 18 reviews (15.8%), the results of the publication bias assessment led to less confidence in the results.
Furthermore, Egger's test was conducted for more precise publication bias assessment and the result indicated no publication bias for pooled OS as well (p = 0.788).
If the methods were lacking but the results of a publication bias assessment were described, it was also scored as an investigation of publication bias.
Last but not least, the investigators conducted the publication bias assessment using Egger's test and Begg's test, we advise that the visual funnel plots should be provided.
Web appendix 8 shows the detailed methods, 28 along with descriptions of each PUFA intervention trial, publication bias assessment, heterogeneity analyses, pooled risk estimates for mortality outcomes, and sensitivity analyses.
