The DOI matches its Crossref record; 254 of the 254 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts.
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Abstracts of presentations at scientific meetings are usually available only in conference proceedings. If subsequent full publication of results reported in these abstracts is based on the magnitude or direction of the results, publication bias may result. Publication bias creates problems for those conducting systematic reviews or relying on the published literature for evidence about health and social care. OBJECTIVES: To systematically review reports of studies that have examined the proportion of meeting abstracts and other summaries that are subsequently published in full, the time between meeting presentation and full publication, and factors associated with full publication. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Science Citation Index, reference lists, and author files. The most recent search was done in February 2016 for this substantial update to our earlier Cochrane Methodology Review (published in 2007). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included reports of methodology research that examined the proportion of biomedical results initially presented as abstracts or in summary form that were subsequently published. Searches for full publications had to be at least two years after meeting presentation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We calculated the proportion of abstracts published in full using a random-effects model. Dichotomous variables were analyzed using risk ratio (RR), with multivariable models taking into account various characteristics of the reports. We assessed time to publication using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. MAIN RESULTS: Combining data from 425 reports (307,028 abstracts) resulted in an overall full publication proportion of 37.3% (95% confidence interval (CI), 35.3% to 39.3%) with varying lengths of follow-up. This is significantly lower than that found in our 2007 review (44.5%. 95% CI, 43.9% to 45.1%). Using a survival analyses to estimate the proportion of abstracts that would be published in full by 10 years produced proportions of 46.4% for all studies; 68.7% for randomized and controlled trials and 44.9% for other studies. Three hundred and fifty-three reports were at high risk of bias on one or more items, but only 32 reports were considered at high risk of bias overall.Forty-five reports (15,783 abstracts) with 'positive' results (defined as any 'significant' result) showed an association with full publication (RR = 1.31; 95% CI 1.23 to 1.40), as did 'positive' results defined as a result favoring the experimental treatment (RR =1.17; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.28) in 34 reports (8794 abstracts). Results emanating from randomized or controlled trials showed the same pattern for both definitions (RR = 1.21; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.32 (15 reports and 2616 abstracts) and RR = 1.17; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.32 (13 reports and 2307 abstracts), respectively.Other factors associated with full publication include oral presentation (RR = 1.46; 95% CI 1.40 to 1.52; studied in 143 reports with 115,910 abstracts); acceptance for meeting presentation (RR = 1.65; 95% CI 1.48 to 1.85; 22 reports with 22,319 abstracts); randomized trial design (RR = 1.51; 95% CI 1.36 to 1.67; 47 reports with 28,928 abstracts); and basic research (RR = 0.78; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.82; 92 reports with 97,372 abstracts). Abstracts originating at an academic setting were associated with full publication (RR = 1.60; 95% CI 1.34 to 1.92; 34 reports with 16,913 abstracts), as were those considered to be of higher quality (RR = 1.46; 95% CI 1.23 to 1.73; 12 reports with 3364 abstracts), or having high impact (RR = 1.60; 95% CI 1.41 to 1.82; 11 reports with 6982 abstracts). Sensitivity analyses excluding reports that were abstracts themselves or classified as having a high risk of bias did not change these findings in any important way.In considering the reports of the methodology research that we included in this review, we found that reports published in English or from a native English-speaking country found significantly higher proportions of studies published in full, but that there was no association with year of report publication. The findings correspond to a proportion of abstracts published in full of 31.9% for all reports, 40.5% for reports in English, 42.9% for reports from native English-speaking countries, and 52.2% for both these covariates combined. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: More than half of results from abstracts, and almost a third of randomized trial results initially presented as abstracts fail to be published in full and this problem does not appear to be decreasing over time. Publication bias is present in that 'positive' results were more frequently published than 'not positive' results. Reports of methodology research written in English showed that a higher proportion of abstracts had been published in full, as did those from native English-speaking countries, suggesting that studies from non-native English-speaking countries m
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Several studies have found that intervention studies are particularly vulnerable to publication bias and for lacking replicability (Cuijpers et al., 2010; Scherer et al., 2007).”
From Working Memory Training Does Not Improve Performance on Measures of Intelligence or Other Measures of “Far Transfer”: Evidence From a Meta-Analytic Review (2016) · cites this paper as Scherer et al., 2007
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“Several empirical investigations have shown that the findings from clinical trials are more likely to be published if the results are statistically significant (p<0.05) than if they are not [125],[206],[207].”
From The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009) · cites this paper as [207]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Publication bias in clinical research
Easterbrook, P. J., Gopalan, R., Berlin, J. A., & Matthews, D. R. (1991) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/0140-6736(91)90201-y · Cited by 3,109
Design of the Women’s Health Initiative Clinical Trial and Observational Study
The Women’s Health Initiative Study Group (1998) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/s0197-2456(97)00078-0 · Cited by 2,580
Factors Influencing Publication of Research Results
Dickersin, K. (1992) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1992.03480030052036 · Cited by 931
Direction and impact of language bias in meta-analyses of controlled trials: empirical study
Jüni, P., Holenstein, F., Sterne, J., Bartlett, C., & Egger, M. (2002) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/31.1.115 · Cited by 892
Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects
Stern, J. M., & Simes, R. J. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.640 · Cited by 818
A refined method for the meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials with binary outcome
Hartung, J., & Knapp, G. (2001) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1009 · Cited by 775
Publication bias: the case for an international registry of clinical trials.
Simes, R. J. (1986) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.1986.4.10.1529 · Cited by 747
Publication bias and clinical trials
Dickersin, K., Chan, S., Chalmersx, T. C., Sacks, H. S., & Smith, H. (1987) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(87)90155-3 · Cited by 715
Underreporting Research Is Scientific Misconduct
Chalmers, I. (1990) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.263.10.1405 · Cited by 640
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.279.4.281 · Cited by 632
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- Arrive, 2001, Publication rate of papers originally presented at the National French Congress of Radiology in 1996, J Radiol, 82, 1719
- Bernstein, 1983, The natural histroy of the publication of abstracts, Hepatology, 3, 867
- Craig, 2001, Publication rates for presentations at British Orthopaedic Association meetings from 1980 to 1984 and 1990 to 1994, CME Orthopaedics, 2, 40
- Goldman, 1982, Publication rates of research originally presented in abstract form in three suspecialities of internal medicine, Clinical Research, 30, 13
- Hopewell S Clarke M Abstract to full publication - findings from the 1st Symposium on Systematic Reviews 3rd Symposium on Systematic Reviews: Beyond the Basics Oxford, UK July, 2000
- Juzych MS Shin DH Coffey J Parrow K Briggs KS Pattern of publication of ophthalmic abstracts in peer-reviewed journals American Academy of Ophthalmology Atlanta, Georgia 1990 · DOI
- Maleck WH Koetter KP Lenz M Are papers presented at prehospital care research forum published in Medline-indexed journals? Proceedings of the Prehospital Care Research Forum; 1998 March 11-14; Baltimore Carlsbad (CA) Jems Communications 1998 S 12
- Maleck WH Petroianu GA Jatzko A Are papers presented at PECEMS published in Medline-indexed journals? Proceeding of the Fourth Pan-European Conference on Emergency Medical Systems; 1998 Aug 23-27; Opatija, Croatia 1998 22
- Todd NW Selection of abstracts for an otolaryngology meeting: Correlation of blinding with subsequent publication Proceedings of The International Congress on Biomedical Peer Review and Global Communications; 1997 Sept 17-21; Prague, Czech Republic JAMA, BMJ, Project HOPE 1997 47
- Vuckovic-Dekic, 2001, Research results presented at scientific meetings: to publish or not?, Archiv Oncol, 9, 161
- Hopewell S Clarke M Quality of trials reported as conference abstracts: how well are they reported? XI Cochrane Colloquium: Evidence Health Care and Culture Barcelona, Spain
- Sanders, 2000, Full publication of abstracts presented at the British Society of Gastroenterology, Gut, 46, A18
- Scherer, 1994, Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts, JAMA, 272, 158, 10.1001/jama.1994.03520020084025 · DOI · Paper page
- Scherer, 2007, Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 10.1002/14651858.MR000005.pub3
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100 · Cited by 28,164
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gotzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2700 · Cited by 17,648
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006 · Cited by 10,578
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00136 · Cited by 10,349
Vandenbroucke, J. P., von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Mulrow, C. D., Pocock, S. J., Poole, C., Schlesselman, J. J., Egger, M., & Initiative, F. T. S. (2007) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040297 · Cited by 8,613
Self-citationFunnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis
Sterne, J. A. C., & Egger, M. (2001) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(01)00377-8 · Cited by 3,779
Rethlefsen, M. L., Kirtley, S., Waffenschmidt, S., Ayala, A. P., Moher, D., Page, M. J., & Koffel, J. (2019) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/sfc38 · Cited by 3,696
Vandenbroucke, J. P., Elm, E. V., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Mulrow, C. D., Pocock, S. J., Poole, C., Schlesselman, J. J., Egger, M., & initiative, F. T. S. (2007) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-147-8-200710160-00010-w1 · Cited by 3,543
Self-citationLiberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · Italian Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2427/5768 · Cited by 3,374
Rethlefsen, M. L., Kirtley, S., Waffenschmidt, S., Ayala, A. P., Moher, D., Page, M. J., Koffel, J. B., PRISMA-S Group, Blunt, H., Brigham, T., et al. (2021) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-020-01542-z · Cited by 3,714
“Studies show that large percentages of research presented as papers and posters at conferences never make their way into the published literature, particularly if the study’s results were statistically negative [63, 69].”
Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence
Chalmers, I., & Glasziou, P. (2009) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(09)60329-9 · Cited by 2,208
CINeMA: an approach for assessing confidence in the results of a network meta-analysis
Nikolakopoulou, A., Higgins, J. P. T., Papakonstantinou, T., Chaimani, A., Del Giovane, C., Egger, M., & Salanti, G. (2020) · PLOS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1003082 · Cited by 1,935
Is working memory training effective? A meta-analytic review
Melby-Lervåg, M., & Hulme, C. (2013) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0028228 · Cited by 1,782
Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias
Dwan, K., Altman, D. G., Arnaiz, J. A., Bloom, J., Chan, A.-W., Cronin, E., Decullier, E., Easterbrook, P. J., Von Elm, E., Gamble, C., et al. (2008) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0003081 · Cited by 1,546
Dobbins, M., Husson, H., DeCorby, K., & LaRocca, R. L. (2013) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd007651.pub2 · Cited by 1,358
Pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation: an overview and network meta-analysis
Cahill, K., Stevens, S., Perera, R., & Lancaster, T. (2013) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd009329.pub2 · Cited by 1,243
Dwan, K., Gamble, C., Williamson, P. R., Kirkham, J. J., & the Reporting Bias Group (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0066844 · Cited by 1,127
Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases
Song, F., Parekh, Hooper, L., Loke, Y., Ryder, J., Sutton, A., Hing, C., Kwok, C., Pang, C., & Harvey, I. (2010) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta14080 · Cited by 1,039
Melby-Lervåg, M., Redick, T. S., & Hulme, C. (2016) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691616635612 · Cited by 983
Publication bias in clinical trials due to statistical significance or direction of trial results
Hopewell, S., Loudon, K., Clarke, M. J., Oxman, A. D., & Dickersin, K. (2009) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.mr000006.pub3 · Cited by 898
Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists' Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data
Fanelli, D. (2010) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0010271 · Cited by 805
Hunter, J. P., Saratzis, A., Sutton, A. J., Boucher, R. H., Sayers, R. D., & Bown, M. J. (2014) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.03.003 · Cited by 786
Hopewell, S., Clarke, M., Moher, D., Wager, E., Middleton, P., Altman, D. G., Schulz, K. F., & and the CONSORT Group (2008) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0050020 · Cited by 674
Ferguson, C. J., & Heene, M. (2012) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691612459059 · Cited by 603
Antenatal corticosteroids for accelerating fetal lung maturation for women at risk of preterm birth
McGoldrick, E., Stewart, F., Parker, R., & Dalziel, S. R. (2020) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004454.pub4 · Cited by 614
Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions
Hopewell, S., McDonald, S., Clarke, M. J., & Egger, M. (2007) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.mr000010.pub3 · Cited by 598
Depression and anxiety in patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: a systematic review
Neuendorf, R., Harding, A., Stello, N., Hanes, D., & Wahbeh, H. (2016) · Journal of Psychosomatic Research · doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2016.06.001 · Cited by 561
Pharmacotherapy for post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
Stein, D. J., Ipser, J. C., Seedat, S., Sager, C., & Amos, T. (2006) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd002795.pub2 · Cited by 519
CONSORT for reporting randomised trials in journal and conference abstracts
Hopewell, S., Clarke, M., Moher, D., Wager, E., Middleton, P., Altman, D. G., & Schulz, K. F. (2008) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(07)61835-2 · Cited by 458
Reporting bias in medical research - a narrative review
McGauran, N., Wieseler, B., Kreis, J., Schüler, Y.-B., Kölsch, H., & Kaiser, T. (2010) · Trials · doi:10.1186/1745-6215-11-37 · Cited by 452
Publication Bias in Editorial Decision Making
Olson, C. M. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.287.21.2825 · Cited by 395
Schwingshackl, L., Knüppel, S., Schwedhelm, C., Hoffmann, G., Missbach, B., Stelmach-Mardas, M., Dietrich, S., Eichelmann, F., Kontopanteils, E., Iqbal, K., et al. (2016) · Advances in Nutrition · doi:10.3945/an.116.013052 · Cited by 360
Searching for studies: a guide to information retrieval for Campbell systematic reviews
Kugley, S., Wade, A., Thomas, J., Mahood, Q., Jørgensen, A. K., Hammerstrøm, K., & Sathe, N. (2017) · Campbell Systematic Reviews · doi:10.4073/cmg.2016.1 · Cited by 371
Melby-Lervåg, M., & Lervåg, A. (2014) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0033890 · Cited by 363
Is the coverage of google scholar enough to be used alone for systematic reviews
Gehanno, J.-F., Rollin, L., & Darmoni, S. (2013) · BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · doi:10.1186/1472-6947-13-7 · Cited by 357
“Furthermore, we excluded from our gold standard dat base personal communications, because they cannot be retrieved by any database, and abstracts because it has been clearly demonstrated that such abstracts often display non -valid results [21,22].”
Soomro, G. M., Altman, D. G., Rajagopal, S., & Oakley Browne, M. (2008) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd001765.pub3 · Cited by 342
Cures That Harm: Unanticipated Outcomes of Crime Prevention Programs
McCord, J. (2003) · The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science · doi:10.1177/0002716202250781 · Cited by 338
Page, M. J., Sterne, J. A. C., Higgins, J. P. T., & Egger, M. (2021) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1468 · Cited by 294
Newer generation antidepressants for depressive disorders in children and adolescents
Hetrick, S. E., McKenzie, J. E., Cox, G. R., Simmons, M. B., & Merry, S. N. (2012) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004851.pub3 · Cited by 291
Schmucker, C., Schell, L. K., Portalupi, S., Oeller, P., Cabrera, L., Bassler, D., Schwarzer, G., Scherer, R. W., Antes, G., von Elm, E., et al. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0114023 · Cited by 269
Self-citationTesting for the Presence of Positive-Outcome Bias in Peer Review: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Emerson, G. B., Warme, W. J., Wolf, F. M., Heckman, J. D., Brand, R. A., & Leopold, S. S. (2010) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2010.406 · Cited by 245
Considering bias and conflicts of interest among the included studies
Boutron, I., Page, M. J., Higgins, J. P., Altman, D. G., Lundh, A., Hróbjartsson, A., & on behalf of the Cochrane Bias Methods Group (2019) · Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions · doi:10.1002/9781119536604.ch7 · Cited by 258
Time to publication for results of clinical trials
Hopewell, S., Clarke, M. J., Stewart, L., & Tierney, J. (2007) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.mr000011.pub2 · Cited by 243
Royle, P., & Waugh, N. (2003) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta7340 · Cited by 194
Song, F., Parekh-Bhurke, S., Hooper, L., Loke, Y. K., Ryder, J. J., Sutton, A. J., Hing, C. B., & Harvey, I. (2009) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-9-79 · Cited by 175
A historical review of publication bias
Marks‐Anglin, A., & Chen, Y. (2020) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1452 · Cited by 165
Transition from meeting abstract to full-length journal article for randomized controlled trials.
Toma, M., McAlister, F. A., Bialy, L., Adams, D., Vandermeer, B., & Armstrong, P. W. (2006) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.295.11.1281 · Cited by 159
Cherry-picking by trialists and meta-analysts can drive conclusions about intervention efficacy
Mayo-Wilson, E., Li, T., Fusco, N., Bertizzolo, L., Canner, J. K., Cowley, T., Doshi, P., Ehmsen, J., Gresham, G., Guo, N., et al. (2017) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.07.014 · Cited by 108
Mayo‐Wilson, E., Li, T., Fusco, N., Dickersin, K., & for the MUDS investigators (2018) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1277 · Cited by 114
Hansen, C., Lundh, A., Rasmussen, K., & Hróbjartsson, A. (2019) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.mr000047.pub2 · Cited by 96
Believability of relative risks and odds ratios in abstracts: Cross sectional study.
Gøtzsche, P. C. (2006) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.38895.410451.79 · Cited by 85
A systematic review of effectiveness of decision aids to assist older patients at the end of life
Cardona-Morrell, M., Benfatti-Olivato, G., Jansen, J., Turner, R. M., Fajardo-Pulido, D., & Hillman, K. (2017) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2016.10.007 · Cited by 78
Quality of systematic reviews in pediatric oncology – A systematic review
Lundh, A., Knijnenburg, S. L., Jørgensen, A. W., van Dalen, E. C., & Kremer, L. C. M. (2009) · Cancer Treatment Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.ctrv.2009.08.010 · Cited by 78
Meta-analysis in medical research: Potentials and limitations
Zwahlen, M., Renehan, A., & Egger, M. (2008) · Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations · doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2006.12.001 · Cited by 70
Primer: strengths and weaknesses of meta-analysis
Finckh, A., & Tramèr, M. R. (2008) · Nature Clinical Practice Rheumatology · doi:10.1038/ncprheum0732 · Cited by 62
Dechartres, A., Atal, I., Riveros, C., Meerpohl, J., & Ravaud, P. (2018) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m18-1517 · Cited by 59
Journals’ instructions to authors: A cross-sectional study across scientific disciplines
Malički, M., Aalbersberg, I. J., Bouter, L., & ter Riet, G. (2019) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0222157 · Cited by 56
Sargeant, J. M., & O'Connor, A. M. (2014) · Zoonoses and Public Health · doi:10.1111/zph.12124 · Cited by 42
Searching for unpublished data for Cochrane reviews: cross sectional study
Schroll, J. B., Bero, L., & Gotzsche, P. C. (2013) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.f2231 · Cited by 43
Tharmanathan, P., Calvert, M., Hampton, J., & Freemantle, N. (2008) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-8-12 · Cited by 42
Zeraatkar, D., Pitre, T., Leung, G., Cusano, E., Agarwal, A., Khalid, F., Escamilla, Z., Cooper, M. A., Ghadimi, M., Wang, Y., et al. (2022) · BMJ Medicine · doi:10.1136/bmjmed-2022-000309 · Cited by 44
Control interventions in randomised trials among people with mental health disorders
Faltinsen, E., Todorovac, A., Staxen Bruun, L., Hróbjartsson, A., Gluud, C., Kongerslev, M. T., Simonsen, E., & Storebø, O. J. (2022) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.mr000050.pub2 · Cited by 40
Li, T., Hua, F., Dan, S., Zhong, Y., Levey, C., & Song, Y. (2020) · Journal of Dentistry · doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2020.103471 · Cited by 38
Isojarvi, J., Wood, H., Lefebvre, C., & Glanville, J. (2018) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1294 · Cited by 38
Randomised controlled trials evaluating endometrial scratching: assessment of methodological issues
Li, W., Suke, S., Wertaschnigg, D., Lensen, S., Wang, R., Gurrin, L., & Mol, B. W. (2019) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/dez207 · Cited by 36
Strategies for obtaining unpublished drug trial data: a qualitative interview study
Wolfe, N., Gøtzsche, P. C., & Bero, L. (2013) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/2046-4053-2-31 · Cited by 30
“Background Selective reporting of data from clinical trials, particularly drug trials, has been well documented [1-3].”
BackgroundDuffy, L., Bacon, F., Clarke, C. S., Donkor, Y., Freemantle, N., Gilbody, S., Hunter, R., Kendrick, T., Kessler, D., King, M., et al. (2019) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-019-3390-8 · Cited by 22
Bordewijk, E. M., Wang, R., van Wely, M., Costello, M. F., Norman, R. J., Teede, H., Gurrin, L. C., Mol, B. W., & Li, W. (2020) · Human Reproduction Update · doi:10.1093/humupd/dmaa031 · Cited by 18
Hua, F., Sun, Q., Zhao, T., Chen, X., & He, H. (2019) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029270 · Cited by 20
Vollgraff Heidweiller-Schreurs, C. A., Korevaar, D. A., Mol, B. W. J., Bax, C. J., de Groot, C. J. M., de Boer, M. A., & Bossuyt, P. M. M. (2019) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.07.016 · Cited by 12
Yavchitz, A., Ravaud, P., Hopewell, S., Baron, G., & Boutron, I. (2014) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-14-123 · Cited by 11
Metadata
- Authors
- Scherer, R. W., Langenberg, P., & von Elm, E.
- Affiliations
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
- German Cochrane Center; Dept. Med. Biometry & Statistics; University Medical Center Stefan-Meier-Str. 26 Freiburg Germany 79104
- ORCID
- Scherer, Roberta W
- Venue
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-04-18
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- MR000005-MR000005
- ISSN
- 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-1858
- PMC
- PMC7073270
- OpenAlex
- W1592653824
- Cited by
- 997
- References
- 254
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 63 · 2019: 64 · 2018: 59 · 2017: 66 · 2016: 57 · 2015: 50 · 2014: 47 · 2013: 67 · 2012: 43
- FWCI
- 10.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- new_version (2018-11-20)
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Issues, ethics and legal aspects › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
- Keywords
- publication bias, abstracts, time to publication, conference presentations, scientific conferences, positive results, randomized controlled trials, oral presentations, publication rates, systematic reviews, evidence base
- MeSH terms
- Congresses as Topic, Publishing, Time Factors, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Publication Bias, Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
