The studies didn’t hide negative results — the data look balanced, so we can trust the overall finding that drop sets aren’t better than regular training.
Scientific Claim
There is no evidence of publication bias in the meta-analysis of drop set versus traditional training studies, as funnel plots showed no asymmetry and Egger’s test was non-significant (p = 0.383).
Original Statement
“Egger´s test for funnel plot asymmetry did not indicate any potential publication bias (p = 0.383). Trim-and-fill analysis was, therefore, not carried out.”
Evidence Quality Assessment
Claim Status
appropriately stated
Study Design Support
Design supports claim
Appropriate Language Strength
association
Can only show association/correlation
Assessment Explanation
The claim accurately reflects the statistical test result. No causal language is used, and the verb 'is no evidence' is appropriate for this type of assessment.
Evidence from Studies
Supporting (1)
Effects of Drop Sets on Skeletal Muscle Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
The researchers checked if missing or biased studies were skewing the results, and found no signs of that—so the findings are likely reliable.