Fraudulent studies, unpublished data and their effect on the development of guidelines and evidence-based recommendations;Gefälschte Studien und nicht publizierte Daten: Auswirkung auf die Erarbeitung von Leitlinien und evidenzbasierten Empfehlungen

Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen

Volumn 104, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 284-291

  Lelgemann, Monika ^a   Sauerland, Stefan ^b  

^a Medizinischer Dienst des Spitzenverbandes Bund der Gesetzlichen Krankenkassen EV (MDS)   (Germany)

^b INSTITUTE FOR QUALITY AND EFFICIENCY IN HEALTH CARE IQWIG   (Germany)

Author keywords

clinical guidelines; publication bias; reporting bias; scientific fraud

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONSENSUS; EPIDEMIOLOGY; ETHICS; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; PUBLICATION; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT; STANDARD;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CONSENSUS; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; PUBLICATIONS; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT;

EID: 77956625128     PISSN: 18659217     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2010.03.035     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. A.W. Chan, A. Hrobjartsson, M.T. Haahr, P.C. Gotzsche, and D.G. Altman Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles JAMA 291 20 2004 May 26 2457 2465
2. K. Dwan, D.G. Altman, J.A. Arnaiz, J. Bloom, A.W. Chan, and E. Cronin Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias PLoS One 3 8 2008 e3081
3. Hopewell S, McDonald S, Clarke M, Egger M. Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;(2):MR000010.
4. Hopewell S, Loudon K, Clarke MJ, Oxman AD, Dickersin K. Publication bias in clinical trials due to statistical significance or direction of trial results. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;(1):MR000006.
5. F. Song, S. Parekh-Bhurke, L. Hooper, Y.K. Loke, J.J. Ryder, and A.J. Sutton Extent of publication bias in different categories of research cohorts: a meta-analysis of empirical studies BMC Med Res Methodol 9 2009 79
6. S. Golder, and Y.K. Loke Is there evidence for biased reporting of published adverse effects data in pharmaceutical industry-funded studies? Br J Clin Pharmacol 66 6 2008 Dec 767 773
7. M.L. van Driel, S.A. De, M.J. De, and T. Christiaens Searching for unpublished trials in Cochrane reviews may not be worth the effort J Clin Epidemiol 62 8 2009 Aug 838 844
8. S. Hopewell, L. Wolfenden, and M. Clarke Reporting of adverse events in systematic reviews can be improved: survey results J Clin Epidemiol 61 6 2008 Jun 597 602
9. DGPPN, BÄK, KBV, AkdÄ, BPtK, BApk, et al. S3-Leitlinie/ Nationale VersorgungsLeitlinie Unipolare Depression. 1. Auflage. Berlin, Düsseldorf: DGPPN;ÄZQ;AWMF; 2009.
10. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Depression in Adults (update). London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2009.
11. Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen, Abschlussbericht, Auftrag A05-20A. Selektive Serotonin- und Noradrenalin Wiederaufnahmehemmer (SNRI) bei Patienten mit Depression. Köln: Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen; 2009 Jun 17.
12. Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen. Bupropion, Mirtazapin und Reboxetin bei der Behandlung der Depression;Abschlussbericht; Auftrag A05-20C. Köln: Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen; 2009 Nov 9.
13. E.H. Turner, A.M. Matthews, E. Linardatos, R.A. Tell, and R. Rosenthal Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy N Engl J Med 358 3 2008 Jan 17 252 260
14. B.J. Shea, J.M. Grimshaw, G.A. Wells, M. Boers, N. Andersson, and C. Hamel Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews BMC Med Res Methodol 7 2007 10
15. G.H. Guyatt, A.D. Oxman, G.E. Vist, R. Kunz, Y. Falck-Ytter, and P. onso-Coello GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations BMJ 336 7650 2008 Apr 26 924 926
16. G.H. Guyatt, A.D. Oxman, R. Kunz, G.E. Vist, Y. Falck-Ytter, and H.J. Schunemann What is "quality of evidence" and why is it important to clinicians? BMJ 336 7651 2008 May 3 995 998
17. G.H. Guyatt, A.D. Oxman, R. Kunz, Y. Falck-Ytter, G.E. Vist, and A. Liberati Going from evidence to recommendations BMJ 336 7652 2008 May 10 1049 1051
18. Song F, Parekh S, Hooper L, Loke YK, Ryder J, Sutton AJ, et al. Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases. Health Technol Assess 2010 Feb;14(8):iii, ix-iii, 193.
19. D. Fanelli How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data PLoS One 4 5 2009 e5738
20. J. Couzin, and K. Unger Scientific misconduct. Cleaning up the paper trail Science 312 5770 2006 Apr 7 38 43
21. S.B. Nath, S.C. Marcus, and B.G. Druss Retractions in the research literature: misconduct or mistakes? Med J Aust 185 3 2006 Aug 7 152 154
22. T. Wu, Y. Li, Z. Bian, G. Liu, and D. Moher Randomized trials published in some Chinese journals: how many are randomized? Trials 10 2009 46
23. A. Vickers, N. Goyal, R. Harland, and R. Rees Do certain countries produce only positive results? A systematic review of controlled trials Control Clin Trials 19 2 1998 Apr 159 166
24. N.A. Trikalinos, E. Evangelou, and J.P. Ioannidis Falsified papers in high-impact journals were slow to retract and indistinguishable from nonfraudulent papers J Clin Epidemiol 61 5 2008 May 464 470
25. A. Tatsioni, N.G. Bonitsis, and J.P. Ioannidis Persistence of contradicted claims in the literature JAMA 298 21 2007 Dec 5 2517 2526
26. R. Kunz, M. Wolbers, T. Glass, and J.F. Mann The COOPERATE trial: a letter of concern Lancet 371 9624 2008 May 10 1575 1576
27. W.R. Bezwoda, L. Seymour, and R.D. Dansey High-dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic rescue as primary treatment for metastatic breast cancer: a randomized trial J Clin Oncol 13 10 1995 Oct 2483 2489
28. A. Goldhirsch, J.H. Glick, R.D. Gelber, and H.J. Senn Meeting highlights: International Consensus Panel on the Treatment of Primary Breast Cancer J Natl Cancer Inst 90 21 1998 Nov 4 1601 1608
29. Scottish Intercollegiate Network:Breast cancer in women.a national clinical guideline. Edinburgh: SIGN; 1998.
30. Advanced Breast Cancer Working Group: Clinical practice guidelines for the management of advanced breast cancer. Canberra: National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC); 2001.
31. C. Schmoor, and M. Schumacher Methodological arguments for the necessity of randomized trials in high-dose chemotherapy for breast cancer Breast Cancer Res Treat 54 1 1999 Mar 31 38
32. Veterans Health Administration, Department of Defense:VHA/DoD Clinical practice guideline for the management of postoperative pain (Version1.2). AHA/DoD; 2002.
33. Practice guidelines for acute pain management in the perioperative setting: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Acute Pain Management. Anesthesiology 2004 Jun;100(6):1573-81.
34. Australian and New Zealand College of Anesthetics (ANZCA) and Faculty of Pain Medicine: Acute Pain Management-Scientific Evidence. Melbourne: ANZCA; 2005.
35. E. Neugebauer, M. Becker, S. Sauerland, and H. Laubenthal Wissenschaftsbetrug/Gefälschte Studien: Auswirkungen auf die S3-Leitlinie? Deutsches Ärzteblatt 106 15 2009 Apr 10 A 703
36. S. Straube, S. Derry, H.J. McQuay, and R.A. Moore Effect of preoperative Cox-II-selective NSAIDs (coxibs) on postoperative outcomes: a systematic review of randomized studies Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 49 5 2005 May 601 613
37. P.F. White, H. Kehlet, and S. Liu Perioperative analgesia: what do we still know? Anesth Analg 108 5 2009 May 1364 1367