Report on a pilot project to introduce a publications officer

CMAJ

Volumn 188, Issue 12, 2016, Pages E279-E280

  Cobey, Kelly D ^a,b,c   Galipeau, James ^a   Shamseer, Larissa ^a,b   Moher, David ^a,b  

^a OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ETHICS; HUMAN; MEDICAL RESEARCH; NOTE; PILOT STUDY; PUBLICATION; TRAINING; STANDARDS;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; HUMANS; PILOT PROJECTS; PUBLICATIONS;

EID: 84987849962     PISSN: 08203946     EISSN: 14882329     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.151340     Document Type: Note

References (8)

1. Hemminki E. Study of information submitted by drug companies to licensing authorities. BMJ 1980;280:833-6.
2. Glasziou P, Meats E, Heneghan C, et al. What is missing from descriptions of treatment in trials and reviews? BMJ 2008;336:1472-4.
3. Dwan K, Gamble C, Williamson PR, et al. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias - an updated review. PLoS One 2013;8:e66844.
4. Mallett S, Timmer A, Sauerbrei W, et al. Reporting of prognostic studies of tumour markers: a review of published articles in relation to REMARK guidelines. Br J Cancer 2010;102:173-80.
5. Kilkenny C, Parsons N, Kadyszewski E, et al. Survey of the quality of experimental design, statistical analysis and reporting of research using animals. PLoS One 2009;4:e7824.
6. Chan A, Hrobjartsson A, Haahr MT, et al. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials. JAMA 2004;291:2457-65.
7. Saini P, Loke YK, Gamble C, et al. Selective reporting bias of harm outcomes within studies: findings from a cohort of systematic reviews. BMJ 2014;349:g6501.
8. Moher D, Altman DG. Four proposals to help improve the medical research literature. PLoS Med 2015;12:e1001864.