Literature DB >> 21714359

Why it is important to include unpublished data in systematic reviews.

C Trespidi1, C Barbui, A Cipriani.   

Abstract

It is known that studies with statistically significant results have a higher probability to be published (publication bias). Therefore, studies with no statistically significant differences (or not favoring the investigational drug) may not be found in commonly accessed databases and remain unpublished. Moreover, unpublished data may also refer to information that are not included in study reports published in scientific journals but that may be important to estimate study outcomes. Retrieving unpublished evidence represents a compelling challenge for researchers, and in the present paper we explore how to do it.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21714359     DOI: 10.1017/s2045796011000217

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci        ISSN: 2045-7960            Impact factor:   6.892


  3 in total

1.  Guidance on conducting systematic reviews/meta-analyses of pharmacoepidemiological studies of safety outcomes: the gap is now filled.

Authors:  S Cortese
Journal:  Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci       Date:  2016-04-27       Impact factor: 6.892

Review 2.  Citalopram versus other anti-depressive agents for depression.

Authors:  Andrea Cipriani; Marianna Purgato; Toshi A Furukawa; Carlotta Trespidi; Giuseppe Imperadore; Alessandra Signoretti; Rachel Churchill; Norio Watanabe; Corrado Barbui
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-07-11

3.  Is There Evidence for the Specificity of Closed-Loop Brain Training in the Treatment of Internalizing Disorders? A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Tyson Michael Perez; Jerin Mathew; Paul Glue; Divya B Adhia; Dirk De Ridder
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-03-10       Impact factor: 4.677

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.