Protocols, probity, and publication

The Lancet

Volumn 373, Issue 9674, 2009, Pages 1524-

  Schulz, Kenneth F ^a   Altman, Douglas G ^b   Moher, David ^c  

^a FAMILY HEALTH INTERNATIONAL   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^c OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HUMAN; LETTER; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESEARCH ETHICS; RESEARCH PRIORITY;

EID: 65449178840     PISSN: 01406736     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60859-X     Document Type: Letter

References (5)

1. Summerskill W., Collingridge D., and Frankish H. Protocols, probity, and publication. Lancet 373 (2009) 992
2. Chan A.W., and Altman D.G. Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors. BMJ 330 (2005) 753
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. Dwan K., Altman D.G., Arnaiz J.A., et al. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS ONE 3 (2008) e3081
5. Al-Marzouki S., Roberts I., Evans S., and Marshall T. Selective reporting in clinical trials: analysis of trial protocols accepted by The Lancet. Lancet 372 (2008) 201