Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis: Confidence Intervals for Rosenthal’s Fail-Safe Number

Table 4

95% one-sided confidence limits above which the estimated is significantly higher than , which is the rule of thumb suggested by Rosenthal [11]. represents the number of studies included in a meta-analysis. We choose the variance from a fixed number of studies when the are drawn from a half normal distribution HN(0, 1), as this performed best in the simulations.

	Cutoff point		Cutoff point		Cutoff point		Cutoff point
1	17	41	369	81	842	121	1394
2	26	42	380	82	855	122	1409
3	35	43	390	83	868	123	1424
4	45	44	401	84	881	124	1438
5	54	45	412	85	894	125	1453
6	63	46	423	86	907	126	1468
7	71	47	434	87	920	127	1483
8	79	48	445	88	934	128	1498
9	86	49	456	89	947	129	1513
10	93	50	467	90	960	130	1528
11	99	51	479	91	973	131	1543
12	106	52	490	92	987	132	1558
13	112	53	501	93	1000	133	1573
14	118	54	513	94	1014	134	1588
15	125	55	524	95	1027	135	1603
16	132	56	536	96	1041	136	1619
17	140	57	547	97	1055	137	1634
18	147	58	559	98	1068	138	1649
19	155	59	571	99	1082	139	1664
20	164	60	582	100	1096	140	1680
21	172	61	594	101	1109	141	1695
22	181	62	606	102	1123	142	1711
23	190	63	618	103	1137	143	1726
24	199	64	630	104	1151	144	1742
25	209	65	642	105	1165	145	1757
26	218	66	654	106	1179	146	1773
27	228	67	666	107	1193	147	1788
28	237	68	679	108	1207	148	1804
29	247	69	691	109	1221	149	1820
30	257	70	703	110	1236	150	1835
31	266	71	716	111	1250	151	1851
32	276	72	728	112	1264	152	1867
33	286	73	740	113	1278	153	1883
34	296	74	753	114	1293	154	1899
35	307	75	766	115	1307	155	1915
36	317	76	778	116	1322	156	1931
37	327	77	791	117	1336	157	1947
38	338	78	804	118	1351	158	1963
39	348	79	816	119	1365	159	1979
40	358	80	829	120	1380	160	1995