The time has come to register diagnostic and prognostic research

Clinical Chemistry

Volumn 60, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 580-582

  Altman, Douglas G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL PRACTICE; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; EDITORIAL; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PUBLISHING; REGISTRATION; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DATABASES, FACTUAL; HUMANS; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84897482150     PISSN: 00099147     EISSN: 15308561     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1373/clinchem.2013.220335     Document Type: Editorial

References (18)

1. Chalmers I, Glasziou P, Godlee F. All trials must be registered and the results published. BMJ 2013;346:f105.
2. A consensus statement on research misconduct in the UK. BMJ 2012;344: e1111.
3. Dwan K, Altman DG, Cresswell L, Blundell M, Gamble CL, Williamson PR. Comparison of protocols and registry entries to published reports for randomized controlled trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011:MR000031.
4. 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;14:iii, ix-xi, 1-193.
5. Boutron I, Dutton S, Ravaud P, et al. Reporting and interpretation of randomized controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant results for primary outcomes. JAMA 2010;303:2058-64.
6. Turner L, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D. Does use of the CONSORT Statement impact the completeness of reporting of randomized controlled trials published in medical journals? A Cochrane review. Syst Rev 2012;1:60.
7. Peters J, Mengersen K. Selective reporting of adjusted estimates in observational epidemiology studies: reasons and implications for meta-analyses. Eval Health Prof 2008;31:370-89.
8. Kavvoura FK, McQueen MB, Khoury MJ, Tanzi RE, Bertram L, Ioannidis JP. Evaluation of the potential excess of statistically significant findings in published genetic association studies: Application to Alzheimer's disease. Am J Epidemiol 2008;168:855-65.
9. Sena ES, van der Worp HB, Bath PM, Howells DW, Macleod MR. Publication bias in reports of animal stroke studies leads to major overstatement of efficacy. PLoS Biol 2010;8:e1000344.
10. Kyzas PA, Loizou KT, Ioannidis JP. Selective reporting biases in cancer prognostic factor studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:1043-55. (Pubitemid 41417921)
11. Kyzas PA, Denaxa-Kyza D, Ioannidis JP. Almost all articles on cancer prognostic markers report statistically significant results. Eur J Cancer 2007;43:2559-79. (Pubitemid 350086938)
12. Trouble at the lab. Economist. 2013 Oct 19. Available at: .http://www. economist.com/news/briefing/21588057-scientists-think-science-self- correctingalarming- degree-it-not-trouble.
13. Rifai N, Altman DG, Bossuyt PM. Reporting bias in diagnostic and prognostic studies: time for action. Clin Chem 2008;54:1101-3. (Pubitemid 352009682)
14. Korevaar DA, Ochodo EA, Bossuyt PM, Hooft L. Publication and reporting of test accuracy studies registered in ClinicalTrials.gov. Clin Chem 2014; 60:651-9.
15. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 2013;310:2191-4.
16. Williams RJ, Tse T, Harlan WR, Zarin DA. Registration of observational studies: is it time? CMAJ 2010;182:1638-42.
17. Andre F, McShane LM, Michiels S, Ransohoff DF, Altman DG, Reis-Filho JS, et al. Biomarker studies: A call for a comprehensive biomarker study registry. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2011;8:171-6.
18. Hooft L, Bossuyt PM. Prospective registration of marker evaluation studies: time to act. Clin Chem 2011;57:1684-6.