scispace - formally typeset
Journal ArticleDOI

Selective Publication of Antidepressant Trials and Its Influence on Apparent Efficacy

TLDR
A systematic literature search found that among 74 FDA-registered studies, 31%, accounting for 3449 study participants, were not published, and the increase in effect size ranged from 11 to 69% for individual drugs and was 32% overall.
Abstract
Background Evidence-based medicine is valuable to the extent that the evidence base is complete and unbiased. Selective publication of clinical trials — and the outcomes within those trials — can lead to unrealistic estimates of drug effectiveness and alter the apparent risk–benefit ratio. Methods We obtained reviews from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for studies of 12 antidepressant agents involving 12,564 patients. We conducted a systematic literature search to identify matching publications. For trials that were reported in the literature, we compared the published outcomes with the FDA outcomes. We also compared the effect size derived from the published reports with the effect size derived from the entire FDA data set. Results Among 74 FDA-registered studies, 31%, accounting for 3449 study participants, were not published. Whether and how the studies were published were associated with the study outcome. A total of 37 studies viewed by the FDA as having positive results were published; 1 stu...

read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration

TL;DR: The meaning and rationale for each checklist item is explained, and an example of good reporting is included and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are included.
Journal ArticleDOI

Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation.

TL;DR: The PRISMA-P checklist as mentioned in this paper provides 17 items considered to be essential and minimum components of a systematic review or meta-analysis protocol, as well as a model example from an existing published protocol.
References
More filters
Book

Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences

TL;DR: The concepts of power analysis are discussed in this paper, where Chi-square Tests for Goodness of Fit and Contingency Tables, t-Test for Means, and Sign Test are used.
Journal ArticleDOI

Meta-Analysis in Clinical Trials*

TL;DR: This paper examines eight published reviews each reporting results from several related trials in order to evaluate the efficacy of a certain treatment for a specified medical condition and suggests a simple noniterative procedure for characterizing the distribution of treatment effects in a series of studies.
Journal ArticleDOI

The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration

TL;DR: The meaning and rationale for each checklist item is explained, and an example of good reporting is included and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are included.
Book

Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis

TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a model for estimating the effect size from a series of experiments using a fixed effect model and a general linear model, and combine these two models to estimate the effect magnitude.
Related Papers (5)