22 September 2020>: Meta-Analysis
Prevalence and Prevention of Reproducibility Deficiencies in Life Sciences Research: Large-Scale Meta-Analyses
Nadine M. Mansour 12ABCDEF , E. Andrew Balas 1ACDE* , Frances M. Yang 3CDE , Marlo M. Vernon 4BCEFDOI: 10.12659/MSM.922016
Med Sci Monit 2020; 26:e922016
Table 2 Subgroup analysis of the estimated variation of reproducibility deficiencies in high-income and middle-income countries.
Deficiency concepts | Studies | Sample | Combined I2 % | High-income I2 % | Middle-income I2 % |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sample/power calculation deficiency | 16 | 1486 | 81.78% | 84.17% | 85.40% |
Misidentified cell lines | 18 | 5610 | 94.45% | 93.14% | 97.96% |
Mycoplasma contamination in cell lines | 30 | 57052 | 99.39% | 99.08% | 69.99% |
Parametric test for non-parametric data vice versa | 9 | 753 | 78.73% | 88.09% | 83.71% |
Related data independent test or vice versa | 10 | 1695 | 91.82% | 95.68% | 95.26% |
Mean (SD) used for non-normal or ordinal data | 8 | 3331 | 73.99% | 38.17% | 10.16% |
Failure to report the exact p-value | 12 | 4094 | 98.13% | 74.62% | 99.22% |
P-value significance level not defined | 6 | 434 | 0.00% | 69.01% | 0.00% |
Name of statistical software not mentioned | 8 | 758 | 82.15% | 70.89% | 92.63% |
Number of tails not stated | 8 | 608 | 84.46% | 85.63% | 74.92% |