Cancer randomized trials showed that dissemination bias is still a problem to be solved

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 77, Issue , 2016, Pages 84-90

  Urrútia, Gerard ^a,b   Ballesteros, Mónica ^a,b   Djulbegovic, Benjamin ^c,d   Gich, Ignasi ^a,b,e   Roqué, Marta ^a,b   Bonfill, Xavier ^a,b,e  

^a BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE SANT PAU IIB SANT PAU   (Spain)

^b CIBER EPIDEMIOLOGÍA Y SALUD PÚBLICA CIBERESP   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

^d H LEE MOFFITT CANCER CENTER AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITAT AUTÒNOMA DE BARCELONA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Cancer; Dissemination bias; Location bias; Publication bias; Publication rate; Randomized controlled trial

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIBLIOMETRICS; CANCER RESEARCH; HUMAN; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); STATISTICAL BIAS; NEOPLASMS; PUBLISHING; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; TIME FACTOR;

BIBLIOMETRICS; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; NEOPLASMS; PUBLICATION BIAS; PUBLICATIONS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84994525740     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.04.011     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. [1] Pich, J., Carne, X., Arnaiz, J.A., Gomez, B., Trilla, A., Rodes, J., Role of a research ethics committee in follow-up and publication of results. Lancet 361 (2003), 1015–1016.
2. [2] Antes, G., Chalmers, I., Under-reporting of clinical trials is unethical. Lancet 361 (2003), 978–979.
3. [3] Kirkham, J.J., Dwan, K.M., Altman, D.G., Gamble, C., Dodd, S., Smyth, R., et al. The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews. BMJ, 340, 2010, c365.
4. [4] Ross, J.S., Tse, T., Zarin, D.A., Xu, H., Zhou, L., Krumholz, H.M., Publication of NIH funded trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov: cross sectional analysis. BMJ, 344, 2012, d7292.
5. [5] Turner, E.H., Knoepflmacher, D., Shapley, L., Publication bias in antipsychotic trials: an analysis of efficacy comparing the published literature to the US Food and Drug Administration database. Plos Med, 9, 2012, e1001189.
6. [6] Muller, K.F., Briel, M., D'Amario, A., Kleijnen, J., Marusic, A., Wager, E., et al. Defining publication bias: protocol for a systematic review of highly cited articles and proposal for a new framework. Syst Rev, 2, 2013, 34.
7. [7] Hopewell, S., Loudon, K., Clarke, M.J., Oxman, A.D., Dickersin, K., Publication bias in clinical trials due to statistical significance or direction of trial results. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2009, MR000006.
8. [8] Dwan, K., Altman, D.G., Arnaiz, J.A., Bloom, J., Chan, A.W., Cronin, E., et al. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS One, 3, 2008, e3081.
9. [9] Gotzsche, P.C., Why we need easy access to all data from all clinical trials and how to accomplish it. Trials, 12, 2011, 249.
10. [10] Littmann, J., Antes, G., Strech, D., Meerpohl, J.J., To overcome failure to publish negative findings: the OPEN project. Maturitas 76 (2013), 111–112.
11. [11] Higgins, J.P.T., Green, S., (eds.) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0, 2011 www.cochrane-handbook.org.
12. [12] Dickersin, K., The existence of publication bias and risk factors for its occurrence. JAMA 263 (1990), 1385–1389.
13. [13] Dickersin, K., Min, Y.I., Meinert, C.L., Factors influencing publication of research results. Follow-up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards. JAMA 267 (1992), 374–378.
14. [14] Lundh, A., Krogsboll, L.T., Gotzsche, P.C., Sponsors' participation in conduct and reporting of industry trials: a descriptive study. Trials, 13, 2012, 146.
15. [15] Bonfill, X., Ballesteros, M., Gich, I., Serrano, M.A., Garcia Lopez, F., Urrutia, G., Description of the protocols for randomized controlled trials on cancer drugs conducted in Spain (1999-2003). PLoS One, 8, 2013, e79684.
16. [16] Song, F., Parekh, S., Hooper, L., Loke, Y.K., Ryder, J., Sutton, A.J., et al. Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases. Heal Technol Assess 14 (2010), 1–193 iii, ix–xi.
17. [17] Ioannidis, J.P., Effect of the statistical significance of results on the time to completion and publication of randomized efficacy trials. JAMA 279 (1998), 281–286.
18. [18] Chan, A.W., Hrobjartsson, A., Haahr, M.T., Gotzsche, P.C., Altman, D.G., Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA 291 (2004), 2457–2465.
19. [19] Schmucker, C., Schell, L.K., Portalupi, S., Oeller, P., Cabrera, L., Bassler, D., et al. Extent of non-publication in cohorts of studies approved by research ethics committees or included in trial registries. PLoS One, 9, 2014, e114023.
20. [20] Easterbrook, P.J., Berlin, J.A., Gopalan, R., Matthews, D.R., Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 337 (1991), 867–872.
21. [21] Dickersin, K., Chan, S., Chalmers, T.C., et al. Publication bias and clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 8 (1987), 343–353.
22. [22] Kasenda, B., von Elm, E., You, J., Blumle, A., Tomonaga, Y., Saccilotto, R., et al. Prevalence, characteristics, and publication of discontinued randomized trials. JAMA 311 (2014), 1045–1051.
23. [23] Rosenthal, R., Kasenda, B., Dell-Kuster, S., von Elm, E., You, J., Blumle, A., et al. Completion and publication rates of randomized controlled trials in surgery: an empirical study. Ann Surg 262 (2015), 68–73.
24. [24] Ioannidis, J.P., Greenland, S., Hlatky, M.A., Khoury, M.J., Macleod, M.R., Moher, D., et al. Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis. Lancet 383 (2014), 166–175.
25. [25] Doshi, P., Jefferson, T., Del Mar, C., The imperative to share clinical study reports: recommendations from the Tamiflu experience. Plos Med, 9, 2012, e1001201.
26. [26] Al-Shahi Salman, R., Beller, E., Kagan, J., Hemminki, E., Phillips, R.S., Savulescu, J., et al. Increasing value and reducing waste in biomedical research regulation and management. Lancet 383 (2014), 176–185.
27. [27] Chalmers, I., Glasziou, P., Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Obs Gynecol 114 (2009), 1341–1345.
28. [28] Van Lent, M., IntHout, J., Out, H.J., Differences between information in registries and articles did not influence publication acceptance. J Clin Epidemiol 68 (2015), 1059–1067.
29. [29] (IOM) I of M. Sharing clinical trial data: maximizing benefits, minimizing risk. 2015.
30. [30] Bad Science, BMJ, Centre for Evidence-based Medicine, Cochrane Collaboration James Lind Initiative, et al. +AllTrials. AllTrials [Internet]. AllTrials2014. Available at: http://www.alltrials.net/. Accessed November 1, 2013.
31. [31] Meerpohl, J.J., Schell, L.K., Bassler, D., Gallus, S., Kleijnen, J., Kulig, M., et al. Evidence-informed recommendations to reduce dissemination bias in clinical research: conclusions from the OPEN (Overcome failure to Publish nEgative fiNdings) project based on an international consensus meeting. BMJ Open, 5, 2015, e006666.
32. [32] Moorthy, V.S., Karam, G., Vannice, K.S., Kieny, M.P., Rationale for WHO's new position calling for prompt reporting and public disclosure of interventional clinical trial results. Plos Med, 12, 2015, e1001819.
33. [33] Goldacre, B., How to get all trials reported: audit, better data, and individual accountability. Plos Med, 12, 2015, e1001821.