Positive Outcomes Influence the Rate and Time to Publication, but Not the Impact Factor of Publications of Clinical Trial Results
TLDR
Clinical trials with positive outcomes have significantly higher rates and shorter times to publication than those with negative results, however, no differences have been found in terms of impact factor.Abstract:
Objectives
Publication bias may affect the validity of evidence based medical decisions. The aim of this study is to assess whether research outcomes affect the dissemination of clinical trial findings, in terms of rate, time to publication, and impact factor of journal publications.
Methods and Findings
All drug-evaluating clinical trials submitted to and approved by a general hospital ethics committee between 1997 and 2004 were prospectively followed to analyze their fate and publication. Published articles were identified by searching Pubmed and other electronic databases. Clinical study final reports submitted to the ethics committee, final reports synopses available online and meeting abstracts were also considered as sources of study results. Study outcomes were classified as positive (when statistical significance favoring experimental drug was achieved), negative (when no statistical significance was achieved or it favored control drug) and descriptive (for non-controlled studies). Time to publication was defined as time from study closure to publication. A survival analysis was performed using a Cox regression model to analyze time to publication. Journal impact factors of identified publications were recorded. Publication rate was 48·4% (380/785). Study results were identified for 68·9% of all completed clinical trials (541/785). Publication rate was 84·9% (180/212) for studies with results classified as positive and 68·9% (128/186) for studies with results classified as negative (p<0·001). Median time to publication was 2·09 years (IC95 1·61–2·56) for studies with results classified as positive and 3·21 years (IC95 2·69–3·70) for studies with results classified as negative (hazard ratio 1·99 (IC95 1·55–2·55). No differences were found in publication impact factor between positive (median 6·308, interquartile range: 3·141–28·409) and negative result studies (median 8·266, interquartile range: 4·135–17·157).
Conclusions
Clinical trials with positive outcomes have significantly higher rates and shorter times to publication than those with negative results. However, no differences have been found in terms of impact factor.read more
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Separation of Key Biogenic Amines by Capillary Electrophoresis and Determination of Possible Indicators of Sport Fatigue in Athlete's Urine.
TL;DR: A simple, rapid and accurate capillary zone electrophoresis method for the separation of biogenic amines (BAs) and the addition of borax was found effective for improving the isomeric separation of octopamine and dopamine.
Posted ContentDOI
Epitope Prediction of Antigen Protein using Attention-Based LSTM Network
Toshiaki Noumi,Seiichi Inoue,Haruka Fujita,Kugatsu Sadamitsu,Makoto Sakaguchi,Akiko Tenma,Hironori Nakagami +6 more
TL;DR: A deep learning method based on short-term memory with an attention mechanism to consider the characteristics of a whole antigen protein in addition to the target sequence for better accuracy in the experimental prediction of epitope regions using the immune epitope database.
Journal ArticleDOI
Validation of a Measure of Normative Beliefs About Smokeless Tobacco Use.
Sarah E. Adkison,Richard J O'Connor,Maansi Bansal-Travers,K. Michael Cummings,Vaughan W. Rees,Dorothy K. Hatsukami +5 more
TL;DR: Developing a measure of normative beliefs about smokeless tobacco (ST) and establishing the underlying factor structure and evaluating the structure with confirmatory factor analysis utilizing an independent sample of youth are sought to establish the measure's concurrent validity.
Posted ContentDOI
Determinants of high residual post-PCV13 pneumococcal vaccine type carriage in Blantyre, Malawi: a modelling study
José Lourenço,Uri Obolski,Todd D. Swarthout,Todd D. Swarthout,Andrea Gori,Naor Bar-Zeev,Naor Bar-Zeev,Dean Everett,Dean Everett,Arox W. Kamng’ona,Thandie S. Mwalukomo,Andrew A. Mataya,Charles Mwansambo,Marjory Banda,Sunetra Gupta,Neil French,Neil French,Robert S. Heyderman,Robert S. Heyderman +18 more
TL;DR: Accumulation of naturally acquired immunity in age and age-specific transmission potentials with dominance of individuals younger than 5 years of age were key to reproduce observed post-PCV13 VT carriage, but vaccine impact is being offset by a high, age-heterogeneous local force of infection.
Journal ArticleDOI
Diamondback Moth (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae) Exhibits Oviposition and Larval Feeding Preferences Among Crops, Wild plants, and Ornamentals as Host Plants
TL;DR: Understanding ovipositional and larval feeding preferences of diamondback moth can also aid in the development of more accurate monitoring and control strategies for this pest.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Pharmacological interventions for somatoform disorders in adults.
Maria Kleinstäuber,Michael Witthöft,Andrés Steffanowski,Harm W.J. van Marwijk,Wolfgang Hiller,Michael J. Lambert +5 more
TL;DR: A systematic review and meta-analysis of placebo-controlled studies examined the efficacy and tolerability of different types of antidepressants, the combination of an antidepressant and an antipsychotic, antipsychotics alone, or natural products in adults with somatoform disorders in adults to improve optimal treatment decisions.
Journal ArticleDOI
Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement.
Colin B. Begg,Mildred K. Cho,Susan Eastwood,Richard Horton,David Moher,Ingram Olkin,Roy M. Pitkin,Drummond Rennie,Kenneth F. Schulz,David L. Simel,Donna F. Stroup +10 more
TL;DR: For RCTs to ultimately benefit patients, the published report should be of the highest possible standard and should provide the reader with the ability to make informed judgments regarding the internal and external validity of the trial.
Journal ArticleDOI
Publication bias in clinical research
TL;DR: The presence of publication bias in a cohort of clinical research studies is confirmed and it is suggested that conclusions based only on a review of published data should be interpreted cautiously, especially for observational studies.
Journal ArticleDOI
Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement
Colin B. Begg,Mildred K. Cho,Susan Eastwood,Richard Horton,David Moher,Ingram Olkin,Roy M. Pitkin,Drummond Rennie,Kenneth F. Schulz,David L. Simel,Donna F. Stroup +10 more
TL;DR: For RCTs to ultimately benefit patients, the published report should be of the highest possible standard and accurate and complete reporting is needed.
Journal ArticleDOI
Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles.
TL;DR: The reporting of trial outcomes is not only frequently incomplete but also biased and inconsistent with protocols and Published articles, as well as reviews that incorporate them, may therefore be unreliable and overestimate the benefits of an intervention.