Role of editorial and peer review processes in publication bias: Analysis of drug trials submitted to eight medical journals

PLoS ONE

Volumn 9, Issue 8, 2014, Pages

  Van Lent, Marlies ^a   Overbeke, John ^a   Out, Henk Jan ^a,b  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b Teva Pharmaceuticals Europe BV   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DRUG INDUSTRY; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HUMAN; PEER REVIEW; PUBLISHING; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SAMPLE SIZE; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

DRUG INDUSTRY; EDITORIAL POLICIES; HUMANS; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; PUBLICATION BIAS; PUBLISHING; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH SUPPORT AS TOPIC; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 84905836758     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0104846     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Sterne J, Egger M, Moher D, the Cochrane Bias Methods Group (2011) Chapter 10: Addressing reporting biases. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: The Cochrane Collaboration.
2. Dwan K, Gamble C, Williamson PR, Kirkham JJ, Reporting Bias Group (2013) Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias - an updated review. PLoS One 8: e66844.
3. Hopewell S, Loudon K, Clarke MJ, Oxman AD, Dickersin K (2009) Publication bias in clinical trials due to statistical significance or direction of trial results. Cochrane Database Syst Rev: MR000006.
4. Rising K, Bacchetti P, Bero L (2008) Reporting bias in drug trials submitted to the Food and Drug Administration: review of publication and presentation. PLoS Med 5: e217.
5. Lundh A, Sismondo S, Lexchin J, Busuioc OA, Bero L (2012) Industry sponsorship and research outcome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 12: MR000033.
6. Bourgeois FT, Murthy S, Mandl KD (2010) Outcome reporting among drug trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov. Ann Intern Med 153: 158-166.
7. Als-Nielsen B, Chen W, Gluud C, Kjaergard LL (2003) Association of funding and conclusions in randomized drug trials: a reflection of treatment effect or adverse events? JAMA 290: 921-928. (Pubitemid 37430464)
8. Bhandari M, Busse JW, Jackowski D, Montori VM, Schunemann H, et al. (2004) Association between industry funding and statistically significant pro-industry findings in medical and surgical randomized trials. CMAJ 170: 477-480. (Pubitemid 38293642)
9. Sridharan L, Greenland P (2009) Editorial policies and publication bias: the importance of negative studies. Arch Intern Med 169: 1022-1023.
10. Emerson GB, Warme WJ, Wolf FM, Heckman JD, Brand RA, et al. (2010) Testing for the presence of positive-outcome bias in peer review: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med 170: 1934-1939.
11. Olson CM, Rennie D, Cook D, Dickersin K, Flanagin A, et al. (2002) Publication bias in editorial decision making. JAMA 287: 2825-2828. (Pubitemid 34591975)
12. Lee KP, Boyd EA, Holroyd-Leduc JM, Bacchetti P, Bero LA (2006) Predictors of publication: characteristics of submitted manuscripts associated with acceptance at major biomedical journals. Med J Aust 184: 621-626. (Pubitemid 43950335)
13. Lynch JR, Cunningham MR, Warme WJ, Schaad DC, Wolf FM, et al. (2007) Commercially funded and United States-based research is more likely to be published; good-quality studies with negative outcomes are not. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89: 1010-1018. (Pubitemid 46724591)
14. Okike K, Kocher MS, Mehlman CT, Heckman JD, Bhandari M (2008) Publication bias in orthopaedic research: an analysis of scientific factors associated with publication in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American Volume). J Bone Joint Surg Am 90: 595-601. (Pubitemid 351341994)
15. Song F, Parekh-Bhurke S, Hooper L, Loke YK, Ryder JJ, et al. (2009) Extent of publication bias in different categories of research cohorts: a meta-analysis of empirical studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 9: 79.
16. Turner EH, Matthews AM, Linardatos E, Tell RA, Rosenthal R (2008) Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy. N Engl J Med 358: 252-260.
17. Melander H, Ahlqvist-Rastad J, Meijer G, Beermann B (2003) Evidence b(i)ased medicine - selective reporting from studies sponsored by pharmaceutical industry: review of studies in new drug applications. BMJ 326: 1171-1173. (Pubitemid 36649049)
18. Lundh A, Barbateskovic M, Hrobjartsson A, Gotzsche PC (2010) Conflicts of interest at medical journals: the influence of industry-supported randomised trials on journal impact factors and revenue - cohort study. PLoS Med 7: e1000354.
19. Conen D, Torres J, Ridker PM (2008) Differential citation rates of major cardiovascular clinical trials according to source of funding: a survey from 2000 to 2005. Circulation 118: 1321-1327.
20. Kulkarni AV, Busse JW, Shams I (2007) Characteristics associated with citation rate of the medical literature. PLoS One 2: e403.
21. Handel AE, Patel SV, Pakpoor J, Ebers GC, Goldacre B, et al. (2012) High reprint orders in medical journals and pharmaceutical industry funding: case-control study. BMJ 344: e4212.
22. Hopewell S, Clarke M (2003) How important is the size of a reprint order? Int J Technol Assess Health Care 19: 711-714. (Pubitemid 38405644)
23. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (2013) Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. Available: http://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations. pdf. Accesssed 2014 Jul 22.
24. van Lent M, Overbeke J, Out HJ (2013) Recommendations for a uniform assessment of publication bias related to funding source. BMC Med Res Methodol 13: 120.
25. Song F, Parekh S, Hooper L, Loke YK, Ryder J, et al. (2010) Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases. Health Technol Assess 14: iii, ix-xi, 1-193.
26. Dickersin K, Min YI, Meinert CL (1992) Factors influencing publication of research results. Follow-up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards. JAMA 267: 374-378.
27. Okike K, Kocher MS, Mehlman CT, Heckman JD, Bhandari M (2008) Nonscientific factors associated with acceptance for publication in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American Volume). J Bone Joint Surg Am 90: 2432-2437.
28. Wager E, Williams P, the OPEN Project Consortium (2013) "Hardly worth the effort"? Medical journals' policies and their editors' and publishers' views on trial registration and publication bias: quantitative and qualitative study. BMJ 347: f5248.
29. Abbot NC, Ernst E (1998) Publication bias: direction of outcome is less important than scientific quality. Perfusion 11: 182-184.
30. Kravitz RL, Franks P, Feldman MD, Gerrity M, Byrne C, et al. (2010) Editorial peer reviewers' recommendations at a general medical journal: are they reliable and do editors care? PLoS One 5: e10072.
31. Senn S (2012) Misunderstanding publication bias: editors are not blameless after all. F1000Research 1.
32. Glymour MM, Kawachi I (2005) Review of publication bias in studies on publication bias: here's a proposal for editors that may help reduce publication bias. BMJ 331: 638.
33. Smulders YM (2013) A two-step manuscript submission process can reduce publication bias. J Clin Epidemiol 66: 946-947.