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
Increasing value and reducing waste: addressing inaccessible research.
An-Wen Chan,Fujian Song,Andrew J. Vickers,Tom Jefferson,Kay Dickersin,Peter C Gøtzsche,Harlan M. Krumholz,Harlan M. Krumholz,Davina Ghersi,H. Bart van der Worp +9 more
TL;DR: Three main actions are warranted: academic institutions and funders should reward investigators who fully disseminate their research protocols, reports, and participant-level datasets, and standards for the content of protocols and full study reports should be rigorously developed and adopted for all types of health research.
Journal ArticleDOI
Toward understanding the impact of artificial intelligence on labor
Morgan R. Frank,David H. Autor,James Bessen,Erik Brynjolfsson,Erik Brynjolfsson,Manuel Cebrian,David J. Deming,Maryann P. Feldman,Matthew Groh,José Lobo,Esteban Moro,Esteban Moro,Dashun Wang,Hyejin Youn,Iyad Rahwan,Iyad Rahwan +15 more
TL;DR: The barriers that inhibit scientists from measuring the effects of AI and automation on the future of work are discussed and a decision framework that focuses on resilience to unexpected scenarios in addition to general equilibrium behavior is recommended.
Journal ArticleDOI
Accelerometer-based measures in physical activity surveillance: current practices and issues
Željko Pedišić,Adrian Bauman +1 more
TL;DR: It appears that accelerometers still have limitations regarding generalisability, validity, comprehensiveness, simplicity, affordability, adaptability, between-study comparability and sustainability, and the widespread adoption of accelerometers specifically for large-scale PA surveillance systems may be premature.
Journal ArticleDOI
Repurposing metformin: an old drug with new tricks in its binding pockets.
Rosina Pryor,Filipe Cabreiro +1 more
TL;DR: The present review provides a thorough and detailed account of the current understanding of the molecular pharmacology and signalling mechanisms underlying biguanide–protein interactions and focuses on the key role of the microbiota in regulating age-associated morbidities and a potential role for metformin to modulate its function.
Journal ArticleDOI
Determinants of adherence to antiretroviral therapy among HIV-positive adults in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review
Tessa Heestermans,Joyce L. Browne,Susan C Aitken,Sigrid C. J. M. Vervoort,Kerstin Klipstein-Grobusch,Kerstin Klipstein-Grobusch +5 more
TL;DR: The sociodemographic, psychosocial, health status, treatment-related and intervention-related determinants are interlinked and contribute to optimal adherence and Clinics providing ART in SSA should design targeted interventions addressing these determinants to optimise health outcomes.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Predictors of publication: characteristics of submitted manuscripts associated with acceptance at major biomedical journals.
TL;DR: Objective: To identify characteristics of submitted manuscripts that are associated with acceptance for publication by major biomedical journals.
Journal ArticleDOI
The randomized controlled trial gets a middle-aged checkup.
Journal ArticleDOI
Publication and non-publication of clinical trials: longitudinal study of applications submitted to a research ethics committee
TL;DR: Large multi-centre trials with non-commercial funding were more likely to be published than other trials, but most trials were funded by industry.
Journal ArticleDOI
Investigation of within‐study selective reporting in clinical research: follow‐up of applications submitted to a local research ethics committee
TL;DR: The pilot study has shown that within-study selective reporting may be examined qualitatively by comparing the study report with the study protocol, and suggests that it might well be substantial.
Journal ArticleDOI
Publication bias in orthopaedic research: an analysis of scientific factors associated with publication in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American Volume).
TL;DR: Orthopaedic researchers should submit negative and neutral studies for publication, confident that the likelihood of acceptance will not be influenced by the direction of study findings, as positive and nonpositive studies were accepted at similar rates.