Is selective reporting of clinical research unethical as well as unscientific?

International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics

Volumn 37, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 1-7

  Cleophas, R C ^b   Cleophas, T J ^a  

^a Merwede Ziekenhuis   (Netherlands)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Ethical aspects; Medical research; Publication bias; Randomized trials; Selective reporting; Standards for publishing clinical trials; Unreported trials

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIAL; DATA ANALYSIS; HEALTH CARE; HUMAN; HYPOTHESIS; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; PUBLISHING;

CLINICAL TRIALS; ETHICS, MEDICAL; HUMANS; PUBLICATION BIAS; RESEARCH; TREATMENT FAILURE;

EID: 0032920971     PISSN: 09461965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Antman EM, Lau J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC 1992 A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials and recommendations of clinical experts. JAMA 268: 240-248
2. Cardiac Suppression Trial II (CAST II) Investigators 1992 Effect of the antiarrhythmic agent moricizine on survival after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 327: 227-233
3. Chalmers I 1993 Publication bias. Lancet 342: 1116
4. Cleophas TJ, Bailar JC 1985 Statistical concepts fundamental to investigations. N Engl J Med 313: 1026
5. Cleophas TJ 1993 Carryover biases in clinical pharmacology. Eur J Clin Chem Clin Biochem 31: 803-809
6. Cleophas TJ, Tavenier P 1994 Fundamental issues of choosing the right type of trial. Am J Ther I: 327-332
7. Cleophas TJ, Vandenbroucke JP 1996 Is selective reporting of well-designed research ethical as well as scientific? Dutch J Med 140: 509-510
8. Cleophas TJ 1996 Criticism of "negative" studies due to negative correlations. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 50: 1-6
9. Cleophas TJ 1996 Lack of real science of symtom-based care. Clin Res Reg Affairs 13: 167-179
10. Cleophas TJ, Van der Meulen J, Kalmansohn RB 1997 Clinical trials: specific problems associated with the use of a placebo control group. Br J Clin Pharmacol 43: 219-221
11. Cornfield J 1976 Recent methodological contributions to clinical trials. Am J Epidemiol 104: 408-421
12. Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR 1991 Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 337: 867-872
13. Egger M, Smith G 1995 Misleading meta-analysis. BMJ 310: 752-754
14. Freiman JA, Chalmers TC, Smith H, Kuebler RR 1986 The importance of the type II error and sample size in the design and interpretation of the randomized controlled trial: survey of 71 "negative" trials. In: Bailar JC, Mosteller F (eds) Medical Uses of Statistics. NEJM Books, Waltham, MA, pp 272-89
15. Götzsche PC 1987 Reference bias in reports of drug trials. BMJK 295: 654-657
16. Hampton JR on behalf of the PRIME II investigators 1997 Randomised trial of inopamil versus placebo in patients with advanced/severe heart failure. Lancet 349: 971-977
17. Horton R 1997 Medical editors trial amnesty: unreported trial registration form. Lancet 350: 756-757
18. Ioannidis JP, Lau J 1998 Can quality of clinical trials and meta-analyses be quantified? Lancet 352: 590-591
19. Koren G, Graham K, Shear H, Einarson T 1989 Bias against the null hypothesis: the reproductive hazards of cocaine. Lancet II: 1440-1442
20. Lasagna L 1998 The powerful placebo. N Engl J Med 338: 1236-1237
21. Meinert CL 1998 Beyond CONSORT: need for improved reporting standards for clinical trials. JAMA 279: 1487-1489
22. Medical Research Council 1948 Streptomycin treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis. BMJ 2: 769-782
23. Melker HE, Rosendaal FR, Vandenbroucke JP 1993 Is publication bias a medical problem? Lancet 342: 621
24. Mill JS 1865 Methods of scientific investigation. In: System of logic. Longmans Green, London, pp 416-422
25. Moher D, Jadad AR, Tugwell P 1996 Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: current issues and future directions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 12: 195-248
26. Moher D 1998 CONSORT: an evolving tool to help improve the quality of reports of randomized controlled trials. JAMA 279: 1489-1491
27. Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, Cook DJ, Jadad AR, Moher M, Tugwell P, Klassen TP 1998 Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy in meta-analyses? Lancet 352: 609-613
28. Moses LE 1985 Statistical concepts fundamental to investigations. N Engl J Med 312: 890-897
29. Packer M, Carver JR, Rodeheffer RJ, Ivanhoe RJ, DiBianco R, Zeldis SM, Hendrix GH, Bommer WJ, Elkayam U, Kukin ML, Mollis GI, Sollano JA, Shannon J, Tandon PK, DeMets DL for the PROMISE Study Research Group 1991 Effect of oral milrinone on mortality in severe chronic heart failure. N Engl J Med 325: 1468-1475
30. Pearn J 1995 Publication: an ethical imperative. BMJ 310: 1313-1314
31. Pearn J, Chalmers I, Vandenbroucke JP 1996 Is selective reporting of well-designed clinical research ethical as well as scientific? Dutch J Med 140: 220-221
32. Powell-Tuck J, Macrae KD, Healey MJR, Lennard-Jones JE, Parkins RA 1986 A defense of the small clinical trial. BMJ 292: 599-602
33. Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study Group 1994 Randomised trial of cholesterol lowering in 4444 patients with coronary heart disease: the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Lancet 344: 1383-1389
34. Scherer RW, Dickersin K, Langenberg P 1994 Full publication of results initially presented in abstract. A meta-analysis. JAMA 272: 158-162
35. Schulz Kf, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG 1995 Empirical evidence of bias: dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 273: 408-412
36. Simes J 1986 Publication bias: the case for an international registry of clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 4: 1529-1541
37. Sonis J, Joines J 1994 The quality of clinical trials. J Fam Pract 39: 225-235
38. Williamson JW, Goldschmidt PG, Colton T 1986 The quality of medical literature: an analysis of validation assessments. In: Bailar JC, Mosteller F (eds) Medical Uses of Statistics. NEJM Books, Waltham, MA, pp 370-392
39. World Medical Association 1989 Declaration of Helsinki of 1964, after revision adopted by the 41th World Medical Assembly, Hong Kong 1989