Many clinical trials conducted by academic organizations are not published, or are not published completely. Following the US Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007, “The Final Rule” (compliance date April 18, 2017) and a National …
Discrepancies between pre-specified and reported outcomes are an important source of bias in trials. Despite legislation, guidelines and public commitments on correct reporting from journals, outcome misreporting continues to be prevalent. We aimed …
This cross-sectional study examines discrepancies between registered protocols and subsequent publications for drug and diet trials whose findings were published in prominent clinical journals in the last decade. ClinicalTrials.gov was established in …
Objectives To identify and appraise empirical studies on publication and related biases published since 1998; to assess methods to deal with publication and related biases; and to examine, in a random sample of published systematic reviews, measures …
Background
The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement is intended to facilitate better reporting of randomised clinical trials (RCTs). A systematic review recently published in the Cochrane Library assesses whether journal …
Non-significant results are less likely to be reported by authors and, when submitted for peer review, are less likely to be published by journal editors. This phenomenon, known collectively as publication bias, is seen in a variety of scientific …
Objective: To describe the frequency of open science practices in a contemporary sample of studies developing prognostic models using machine-learning methods in the field of oncology.
Study design and setting: We conducted a systematic review, …
Recent literature hints that outcomes of clinical trials in medicine are selectively reported. If applicable to psychotic disorders, such bias would jeopardize the reliability of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating antipsychotics and thus …