Published versus unpublished dissertations in psycho-oncology intervention research.
OBJECTIVE
There are conflicting views regarding whether gray literature, including unpublished doctoral dissertations, should be included in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Although publication status frequently is used as a proxy for study quality, some research suggests that dissertations are often of superior quality to published studies.


METHODS
We examined 107 projects involving doctoral dissertations (42 published, 65 unpublished) that studied psychosocial interventions for cancer patients.


RESULTS
Published dissertations were more likely to be supported by research funding but were not more likely than unpublished dissertations to examine specific types of interventions. Across several indices of methodological quality there were minimal differences. Dissertations with significant findings tended to be more likely to be published than those without significant findings.


CONCLUSIONS
Unpublished dissertations focusing on psychosocial interventions for cancer patients are not necessarily of vastly inferior quality to those that eventually are published. Because doctoral dissertations are easy to access relative to other forms of gray literature, are free from some types of bias, and are reported thoroughly, they merit inclusion in comprehensive literature reviews.
Department of Psychology, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794-2500, USA. anne.moyer@sunysb.edu
Anne
A
Moyer
Stefan
S
Schneider
Sarah K
SK
Knapp-Oliver
Stephanie J
SJ
Sohl
D004212:Academic Dissertations as Topic / Q000592:standards; D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000592:standards; D016009:Chi-Square Distribution; D015928:Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; D006801:Humans; D009369:Neoplasms / Q000523:psychology* / Q000628:therapy; D012944:Social Support