Systematic review finds that study data not published in full text articles have unclear impact on meta-analyses results in medical research.

A meta-analysis as part of a systematic review aims to provide a thorough, comprehensive and unbiased statistical summary of data from the literature. However, relevant study results could be missing from a meta-analysis because of selective publication and inadequate dissemination. If missing outcome data differ systematically from published ones, a meta-analysis will be biased with an inaccurate assessment of the intervention effect. As part of the EU-funded OPEN project (www.open-project.eu) we conducted a systematic review that assessed whether the inclusion of data that were not published at all and/or published only in the grey literature influences pooled effect estimates in meta-analyses and leads to different interpretation. Systematic review of published literature (methodological research projects). Four bibliographic databases were searched up to February 2016 without restriction of publication year or language. Methodological research projects were considered eligible for inclusion if they reviewed a cohort of meta-analyses which (i) compared pooled effect estimates of meta-analyses of health care interventions according to publication status of data or (ii) examined whether the inclusion of unpublished or grey literature data impacts the result of a meta-analysis. Seven methodological research projects including 187 meta-analyses comparing pooled treatment effect estimates according to different publication status were identified. Two research projects showed that published data showed larger pooled treatment effects in favour of the intervention than unpublished or grey literature data (Ratio of ORs 1.15, 95% CI 1.04-1.28 and 1.34, 95% CI 1.09-1.66). In the remaining research projects pooled effect estimates and/or overall findings were not significantly changed by the inclusion of unpublished and/or grey literature data. The precision of the pooled estimate was increased with narrower 95% confidence interval. Although we may anticipate that systematic reviews and meta-analyses not including unpublished or grey literature study results are likely to overestimate the treatment effects, current empirical research shows that this is only the case in a minority of reviews. Therefore, currently, a meta-analyst should particularly consider time, effort and costs when adding such data to their analysis. Future research is needed to identify which reviews may benefit most from including unpublished or grey data

Regulation of Drosophila Brain Wiring by Neuropil Interactions via a Slit-Robo-RPTP Signaling Complex

The axonal wiring molecule Slit and its Round-About (Robo) receptors are conserved regulators of nerve cord patterning. Robo receptors also contribute to wiring brain circuits. Whether molecular mechanisms regulating these signals are modified to fit more complex brain wiring processes is unclear. We investigated the role of Slit and Robo receptors in wiring Drosophila higher-order brain circuits and identified differences in the cellular and molecular mechanisms of Robo/Slit function. First, we find that signaling by Robo receptors in the brain is regulated by the Receptor Protein Tyrosine Phosphatase RPTP69d. RPTP69d increases membrane availability of Robo3 without affecting its phosphorylation state. Second, we detect no midline localization of Slit during brain development. Instead, Slit is enriched in the mushroom body, a neuronal structure covering large areas of the brain. Thus, a divergent molecular mechanism regulates neuronal circuit wiring in the Drosophila brain, partly in response to signals from the mushroom body

Amblyopia and quality of life: a systematic review

Background/Aims Amblyopia is a common condition which can affect up to 5% of the general population. The health-related quality of life (HRQoL) implications of amblyopia and/or its treatment have been explored in the literature. Methods A systematic literature search was undertaken (16th-30th January 2007) to identify the HRQoL implications of amblyopia and/or its treatment. Results A total of 25 papers were included in the literature review. The HRQoL implications of amblyopia related specifically to amblyopia treatment, rather than the condition itself. These included the impact upon family life; social interactions; difficulties undertaking daily activities; and feelings and behaviour. The identified studies adopted a number of methodologies. The study populations included; children with the condition; parents of children with amblyopia; and adults who had undertaken amblyopia treatment as a child. Some studies developed their own measures of HRQoL, and others determined HRQoL through proxy measures. Conclusions The reported findings of the HRQoL implications are of importance when considering the management of cases of amblyopia. Further research is required to assess the immediate and long-term effects of amblyopia and/or its treatment upon HRQoL using a more standardised approach