Outcome reporting bias in trials: A methodological approach for assessment and adjustment in systematic reviews

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 362, Issue , 2018, Pages

  Kirkham, Jamie J ^a   Altman, Douglas G ^b   Chan, An Wen ^c   Gamble, Carrol ^a   Dwan, Kerry M ^d   Williamson, Paula R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^c WOMEN S COLLEGE HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^d Cochrane Editorial Unit ^*  (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); HUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); METHODOLOGY; PROCEDURES; STATISTICAL BIAS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; TRENDS;

BIAS; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); RESEARCH DESIGN; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS AS TOPIC;

EID: 85054049825     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.k3802     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Vedula SS, Bero L, Scherer RW, Dickersin K. Outcome reporting in industry-sponsored trials of gabapentin for of-label use. N Engl J Med 2009;361:1963-71. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa0906126
2. Hutton JL, Williamson PR. Bias in meta-analysis due to outcome variable selection within studies. Appl Stat 2000;49:359-70. doi:10.1111/1467-9876.00197
3. Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA, et al. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS One 2008;3:e3081. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0003081
4. Dwan K, Gamble C, Williamson PR, Kirkham JJ, Reporting Bias Group. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias-an updated review. PLoS One 2013;8:e66844. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0066844
5. Kirkham JJ, Dwan KM, Altman DG, et al. The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews[rg]. BMJ 2010;340:c365. doi:10.1136/bmj.c365
6. Saini P, Loke YK, Gamble C, Altman DG, Williamson PR, Kirkham JJ. Selective reporting bias of harm outcomes within studies: fndings from a cohort of systematic reviews. BMJ 2014;349:g6501. doi:10.1136/bmj.g6501
7. Clarke M, Williamson PR. Core outcome sets and systematic reviews. Syst Rev 2016;5:11. doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0188-6
8. CSG-COUSIN Initiative 2018. https://skin.cochrane.org/core-outcomes-set-initiative-csg-cousin [accessed 8 May 2018].
9. COMET Initiative 2011. http://www.comet-initiative.org/[accessed 8 May 2018].
10. Higgins JPT, Lasserson T, Chandler J, Tovey D, Churchill R. Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews. Cochrane: London, 2016. http://community.cochrane.org/sites/default/fles/uploads/MECIR%20PRINTED%20BOOKLET%20 FINAL%20v1.02.pdf [accessed 13 February 2018].
11. Dwan KM, Williamson PR, Kirkham JJ. Do systematic reviews still exclude studies with "no relevant outcome data"? BMJ 2017;358:j3919. doi:10.1136/bmj.j3919
12. Pulman J, Jette N, Dykeman J, Hemming K, Hutton JL, Marson AG. Topiramate add-on for drug-resistant partial epilepsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;2:CD001417.
13. ORBIT Matrix Generator 2018. http://ctrc.liv.ac.uk/ORBIT/[accessed 8 May 2018].
14. Chan A-W. Out of sight but not out of mind: how to search for unpublished clinical trial evidence. BMJ 2012;344:d8013. doi:10.1136/bmj.d8013
15. Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, et al, Cochrane Bias Methods Group, Cochrane Statistical Methods Group. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2011;343:d5928. doi:10.1136/bmj.d5928
16. Copas J, Marson A, Williamson P, Kirkham J. Model-based sensitivity analysis for outcome reporting bias in the meta analysis of beneft and harm outcomes. Stat Methods Med Res 2017;962280217738546.
17. Copas Adjustment Method 2018. http://outcome-reporting-bias.org/Home/Copas [accessed 8 May 2018].
18. ORBIT Website Contact Page 2018. http://outcome-reporting-bias. org/Home/Contact [accessed 17 September 2018].