Publication bias in clinical trials due to statistical significance or direction of trial results

作者：Sally Hopewell, Kirsty Loudon, Mike Clarke, Andrew D Oxman, Kay Dickersin · 发表于：Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 年份：2009 · DOI：10.1002/14651858.mr000006.pub3 · 被引用次数：903 · 研究领域：Meta-analysis and systematic reviews、Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare、Academic Writing and Publishing

EDITORIAL NOTE: There is a more recent Cochrane review on this topic: https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.MR000011.pub3/full. BACKGROUND: The tendency for authors to submit, and of journals to accept, manuscripts for publication based on the direction or strength of the study findings has been termed publication bias. OBJECTIVES: To assess the extent to which publication of a cohort of clinical trials is influenced by the statistical significance, perceived importance, or direction of their results. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Methodology Register (The Cochrane Library [Online] Issue 2, 2007), MEDLINE (1950 to March Week 2 2007), EMBASE (1980 to Week 11 2007) and Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations (March 21 2007). We also searched the Science Citation Index (April 2007), checked reference lists of relevant articles and contacted researchers to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies containing analyses of the association between publication and the statistical significance or direction of the results (trial findings), for a cohort of registered clinical trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data. We classified findings as either positive (defined as results classified by the investigators as statistically significant (P < 0.05), or perceived as striking or important, or showing a positive direction of effect) or negative (findings that were not statistically significant...