Showing papers by "Alessandro Liberati published in 1992"
TL;DR: Practical ophthalmologists should be aware that the effectiveness of pressure-lowering agents in the treatment of primary open angle glaucoma is still to be determined and that the vast majority of published trials are not appropriate to guide clinical practice.
25 citations
TL;DR: I believe that medical journals should take their own steps against publication bias, and have reservations on the usefulness of registries of trials for individual practitioners who are most of the time not well educated on critical appraisal of the medical literature.
Abstract: To the Editor. —The recent Editorial by Dr Rennie and Ms Flanagin 1 summarized the state of our knowledge on publication bias, its determinants, and the logical possible steps to counteract its existence. While I have no doubts that the implementation of remedial actions (such as prospective registration of trials conditional on funding 2 and careful monitoring by institutional review boards, etc) will be very useful for investigators and "meta-analysts," I have reservations on the usefulness of registries of trials for individual practitioners who are most of the time not well educated on critical appraisal of the medical literature, to say nothing about publication bias. Even though Rennie and Flanagin are correct when, in looking at the findings by Dickersin et al 3 and others, 4 they point out that most publication bias is due to the investigators themselves, I believe that medical journals should take their own steps against
6 citations
1 citations
1 citations