Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa


  • Andra Morrison (a1), Julie Polisena (a2), Don Husereau (a3), Kristen Moulton (a1), Michelle Clark (a1), Michelle Fiander (a4), Monika Mierzwinski-Urban (a1), Tammy Clifford (a5), Brian Hutton (a6) and Danielle Rabb (a1)...

Objectives: The English language is generally perceived to be the universal language of science. However, the exclusive reliance on English-language studies may not represent all of the evidence. Excluding languages other than English (LOE) may introduce a language bias and lead to erroneous conclusions.

Study Design and Setting: We conducted a comprehensive literature search using bibliographic databases and grey literature sources. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they measured the effect of excluding randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported in LOE from systematic review-based meta-analyses (SR/MA) for one or more outcomes.

Results: None of the included studies found major differences between summary treatment effects in English-language restricted meta-analyses and LOE-inclusive meta-analyses. Findings differed about the methodological and reporting quality of trials reported in LOE. The precision of pooled estimates improved with the inclusion of LOE trials.

Conclusions: Overall, we found no evidence of a systematic bias from the use of language restrictions in systematic review-based meta-analyses in conventional medicine. Further research is needed to determine the impact of language restriction on systematic reviews in particular fields of medicine.

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

3. SH Downs , N Black . The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998;52:377384.

5. M Egger , T Zellweger-Zähner , M Schneider , Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German. Lancet. 1997;350:326329.

6.Fung IC-H. Seek, and ye shall find: Accessing the global epidemiological literature in different languages. Emerg Themes Epidemiol. 2008;5:21.

7. G Grégorie , F Derderian , J Le Lorier . Selecting the language of the publications included in a meta-analysis: Is there a tower of Babel bias? J Clin Epidemiol. 1995;48:159163.

10. AR Jadad , RA Moore , D Carroll , Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996;17:112.

11. P Jüni , F Holenstein , J Sterne , C Bartlett , M Egger . Direction and impact of language bias in meta-analyses of controlled trials: Empirical study. Int J Epidemiol. 2002;31:115123.

12. D Moher , B Pham , ML Lawson , TP Klassen . The inclusion of reports of randomised trials published in languages other than English in systematic reviews. Health Technol Assess. 2003;7:iii-90.

13. D Moher , P Fortin , AR Jadad , Completeness of reporting of trials published in languages other than English: Implications for conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. Lancet. 1996 February 10;347:363366.

14. D Moher , B Pham , A Jones , Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet. 1998;352:609613.

15. D Moher , B Pham , TP Klassen , What contributions do languages other than English make on the results of meta-analyses? J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:964972.

18. Z Pan , TA Trikalinos , FK Kavvoura , J Lau , JPA Ioannidis . Local literature bias in genetic epidemiology: An empirical evaluation of the Chinese literature. Plos Med. 2005;2:13091317.

19. B Pham , TP Klassen , ML Lawson , D Moher . Language of publication restrictions in systematic reviews gave different results depending on whether the intervention was conventional or complementary. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:769776.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
  • ISSN: 0266-4623
  • EISSN: 1471-6348
  • URL: /core/journals/international-journal-of-technology-assessment-in-health-care
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *



Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 11
Total number of PDF views: 107 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 704 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 28th May 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.