The impact of selective publication on clinical research in pain

Pain

Volumn 140, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 401-404

  Rowbotham, Michael C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL RESEARCH; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PAIN; POSTHERPETIC NEURALGIA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; REVIEW;

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; DRUG INDUSTRY; PAIN; PUBLICATION BIAS; REGISTRIES; RESEARCH SUPPORT AS TOPIC; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT;

EID: 56949094930     PISSN: 03043959     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2008.10.026     Document Type: Review

References (20)

1. Bekelman J., Yan L., and Gross C. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research. JAMA 289 (2003) 454-465
2. Berlin J.A., Begg C.B., and Louis T.A. An assessment of publication bias using a sample of published clinical trials. J Am Stat Assoc 84 (1989) 381-392
3. Chan A.W., Hrobjartsson A., Haahr M.T., Gotzsche P.C., and Altman D.G. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA 291 (2004) 2457-2465
4. Dickersin K. The existence of publication bias and risk factors for its occurrence. JAMA 263 (1990) 1385-1389
5. Dickersin K., Chan S., Chalmers T.C., Sacks Jr. H.S., and Smith H. Publication bias and clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 8 (1987) 343-353
6. Galer B.S., Lee D., Ma T., Nagle B., and Schlagheck T.G. MorphiDex (morphine sulfate/dextromethorphan hydrobromide combination) in the treatment of chronic pain: Three multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trials fail to demonstrate enhanced opioid analgesia or reduction in tolerance. Pain 115 (2005) 284-295
7. Gavaghan D.J., Moore R.A., and McQuay H.J. An evaluation of homogeneity tests in meta-analyses in pain using simulations of individual patient data. Pain 85 (2000) 415-424
8. Hemminki E. Study of information submitted by drug companies to licensing authorities. Br Med J 280 (1980) 833-836
9. Katz J., Finnerup N.B., and Dworkin R.H. Clinical trial outcome in neuropathic pain. Neurology 70 (2008) 263-272
10. Kerr N.L. HARKing: hypothesizing after the results are known. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 2 (1998) 196-217
11. Lee K., Bacchetti P., and Sim I. Publication of clinical trials supporting successful new drug applications: a literature analysis. PLoS Med 5 (2008) e191
12. Lexchin J., Bero L.A., Djulbegovic B., and Clark O. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ 326 (2003) 1167-1170
13. McQuay H., Carroll D., and Moore A. Variation in the placebo effect in randomised controlled trials of analgesics: all is as blind as it seems. Pain 64 (1996) 331-335
14. McQuay H., and Moore A. Utility of clinical trial results for clinical practice. Eur J Pain 11 (2007) 123-124
15. Polydefkis M., and Raja S.N. What can we learn from failed neuropathic pain trials?. Neurology 70 (2008) 250-251
16. Schofferman J., and Banja J. Conflicts of interest in pain medicine: practice patterns and relationships with industry. Pain 139 (2008) 494-497
17. Sismondo S. Ghost management: how much of the medical literature is shaped behind the scenes by the pharmaceutical industry? PLoS Med 2007. http://medicine.plosjournals.org/archive/1549-1676/4/9/pdf/10.1371_journal.pmed.0040286-L.pdf.
18. Stern J.M., and Simes R.J. Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects. BMJ 315 (1997) 640-645
19. Thienel U., Neto W., Schwabe S.K., and Vijapurkar U. Topiramate in painful diabetic polyneuropathy: findings from three double-blind placebo-controlled trials. Acta Neurol Scand 110 (2004) 221-231
20. Turner E.H., Matthews A.M., Linardatos E., Tell R.A., and Rosenthal R. Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy. N Engl J Med 358 (2008) 252-260