Literature DB >> 25034197

Is there a solution to publication bias? Researchers call for changes in dissemination of clinical research results.

Mario Malički1, Ana Marušić2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To explore opinions of authors of published reports of clinical trials and Cochrane systematic reviews on the causes and methods of preventing publication bias. STUDY DESIGN AND
SETTING: An online questionnaire was developed and sent to researchers publishing in high-impact or national general medical journals, authors of Cochrane systematic reviews, and a general population of researchers. Open-ended questions about publication bias were qualitatively analyzed. We also held a focus group with experienced researchers and/or Cochrane reviewers.
RESULTS: Publication bias was common: 48 (36%) respondents had own unpublished trials and 40 (30%) admitted selective outcome reporting; but researchers felt strongly that blame rested also with the system that promotes and augments publication bias practices. Qualitative analysis of both survey responses and focus group discussion identified possible ways of reducing publication bias through increased transparency, improvements to trial registries, search engines and databases, enhancement of the role of institutional review boards, positive encouragement of scientists, and policy changes.
CONCLUSION: Although well aware of the problem, clinical researchers knowingly contribute to problems of selective reporting and nonpublication of trials. They call for changes in current practices of journal-based communication of trial reporting and for systematic evaluation of measures to decrease publication bias.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Clinical trials; Focus groups; Guideline adherence; Information dissemination; Publication bias; Questionnaires

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25034197     DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.06.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  15 in total

1.  Reporting bias in imaging: higher accuracy is linked to faster publication.

Authors:  A Dehmoobad Sharifabadi; D A Korevaar; T A McGrath; N van Es; R A Frank; L Cherpak; W Dang; J P Salameh; F Nguyen; C Stanley; M D F McInnes
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-03-21       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Evidence-informed recommendations to reduce dissemination bias in clinical research: conclusions from the OPEN (Overcome failure to Publish nEgative fiNdings) project based on an international consensus meeting.

Authors:  Joerg J Meerpohl; Lisa K Schell; Dirk Bassler; Silvano Gallus; Jos Kleijnen; Michael Kulig; Carlo La Vecchia; Ana Marušić; Philippe Ravaud; Andreas Reis; Christine Schmucker; Daniel Strech; Gerard Urrútia; Elizabeth Wager; Gerd Antes
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-05-05       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Hijacked journals are attacking the reliability and validity of medical research.

Authors:  Mehrdad Jalalian
Journal:  Electron Physician       Date:  2014-11-27

Review 4.  Questioning the dichotomy between vegetative state and minimally conscious state: a review of the statistical evidence.

Authors:  Giulia Liberati; Thomas Hünefeldt; Marta Olivetti Belardinelli
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2014-11-03       Impact factor: 3.169

5.  Extent, Awareness and Perception of Dissemination Bias in Qualitative Research: An Explorative Survey.

Authors:  Ingrid Toews; Claire Glenton; Simon Lewin; Rigmor C Berg; Jane Noyes; Andrew Booth; Ana Marusic; Mario Malicki; Heather M Munthe-Kaas; Joerg J Meerpohl
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-08-03       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Do emergency medicine journals promote trial registration and adherence to reporting guidelines? A survey of "Instructions for Authors".

Authors:  Matthew T Sims; Nolan M Henning; C Cole Wayant; Matt Vassar
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2016-11-24       Impact factor: 2.953

Review 7.  The Weak Spots in Contemporary Science (and How to Fix Them).

Authors:  Jelte M Wicherts
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2017-11-27       Impact factor: 2.752

8.  The perceived feasibility of methods to reduce publication bias.

Authors:  Harriet A Carroll; Zoi Toumpakari; Laura Johnson; James A Betts
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 9.  Bias in dissemination of clinical research findings: structured OPEN framework of what, who and why, based on literature review and expert consensus.

Authors:  Dirk Bassler; Katharina F Mueller; Matthias Briel; Jos Kleijnen; Ana Marusic; Elizabeth Wager; Gerd Antes; Erik von Elm; Douglas G Altman; Joerg J Meerpohl
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-01-21       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  Publication proportions for registered breast cancer trials: before and following the introduction of the ClinicalTrials.gov results database.

Authors:  Innocent Gerald Asiimwe; Dickson Rumona
Journal:  Res Integr Peer Rev       Date:  2016-07-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.