The need for trial identifiers
Open accessAbstract
The medical literature is distorted by publication bias, duplicate publication and under-reporting of clinical trials. This can create problems in systematic numbering systems. The inclusion of trial identifiers reviews and meta-analysis which are increasingly used as the basis for evidence-based guidelines and therefore for treatment decisions. Various schemes for identifying trials and their associated publications are reviewed. These include trial registers and trial in all publications could greatly enhance the value of the medical literature and increase the robustness of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
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
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?
It is not uncommon for the same study to go by different names in different publications, which complicates the process of data synthesis.
“It is not uncommon for the same study to go by different names in different publications, which complicates the process of data synthesis.31”
From Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs for the acute treatment of adults with major depressive disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis (2018) · cites this paper as [31]
Wager (p. 205) explains that duplicate reports can be difficult to recognise because they list different authors and lack clear cross-references, and that duplicates can distort meta-analyses. This supports the data-synthesis problem, but our copy does not specifically say that the same study is given different names across publications. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Impact of covert duplicate publication on meta-analysis: a case study
Tramèr, M. R., Reynolds, D. J. M., Moore, R. A., & McQuay, H. J. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.635 · Cited by 702 · see citing works
Underreporting Research Is Scientific Misconduct
Chalmers, I. (1990) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.263.10.1405 · Cited by 634 · see citing works
Melander, H., Ahlqvist-Rastad, J., Meijer, G., & Beermann, B. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7400.1171 · Cited by 626 · see citing works
Good publication practice for pharmaceutical companies
Wager, E., Field, E. A., & Grossman, L. (2003) · Current Medical Research and Opinion · doi:10.1185/030079903125001767 · Cited by 148 · see citing works
Self-citationMultiple publication of reports of drug trials.
G�tzsche, P. C. (1989) · European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · doi:10.1007/bf00558064 · Cited by 113 · see citing works
Is duplicate publishing on the increase?
Waldron, T. (1992) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.304.6833.1029 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Redundant publication in biomedical sciences: Scientific misconduct or necessity?
Jefferson, T. (1998) · Science and Engineering Ethics · doi:10.1007/s11948-998-0043-9 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
A clinical trials register for Europe
Tonks, A. (2002) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.325.7376.1314 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Review of clinical protocols at The Lancet
McNamee, D. (2001) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)05011-x · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Realities of trial registration: the Glaxo Wellcome experience
Gibbs, T. J., & Wager, E. (2000) · International Journal of Pharmaceutical Medicine · doi:10.2165/00124363-200008000-00007 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 11 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cipriani, A., Furukawa, T. A., Salanti, G., Chaimani, A., Atkinson, L. Z., Ogawa, Y., Leucht, S., Ruhe, H. G., Turner, E. H., Higgins, J. P. T., et al. (2018) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(17)32802-7 · Cited by 3,541 · see citing works
Cipriani, A., Furukawa, T. A., Salanti, G., Chaimani, A., Atkinson, L. Z., Ogawa, Y., Leucht, S., Ruhe, H. G., Turner, E. H., Higgins, J. P. T., et al. (2018) · Focus · doi:10.1176/appi.focus.16407 · Cited by 328 · see citing works
Al-Durra, M., Nolan, R. P., Seto, E., & Cafazzo, J. A. (2020) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.m982 · Cited by 89 · see citing works
Comparative efficacy of antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia: a critical assessment.
Tandon, R., & Fleischhacker, W. (2005) · Schizophrenia Research · doi:10.1016/j.schres.2005.07.025 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Trial Registration Numbers Are Underreported in Biomedical Publications
van de Wetering, F. T., Scholten, R. J. P. M., Haring, T., Clarke, M., & Hooft, L. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049599 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Adherence to guidance on registration of randomised controlled trials published in Anaesthesia
El‐Boghdadly, K., Wiles, M. D., Atton, S., & Bailey, C. R. (2018) · Anaesthesia · doi:10.1111/anae.14103 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Why should clinical trials be registered?
Wager, E., & Elia, N. (2014) · European Journal of Anaesthesiology · doi:10.1097/eja.0000000000000084 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Self-citationEthical publishing: the innocent author's guide to avoiding misconduct
Wager, E. (2007) · Menopause international · doi:10.1258/175404507781605604 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Self-citationSinha, M. K., & Montori, V. M. (2006) · Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research · doi:10.1586/14737167.6.5.603 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Bruyère, O., Kanis, J., Ibar-Abadie, M.-E., Alsayed, N., Brandi, M. L., Burlet, N., Cahall, D., Chines, A., Devogelaer, J., Dere, W., et al. (2010) · Osteoporosis International · doi:10.1007/s00198-010-1190-9 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
"Good Publication Practice for Pharmaceutical Companies": where are we now?
Wager, E. (2005) · PubMed Central · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Self-citationPharmaceutical Company Sponsorship of Research: A Review
Sismondo, S. (2006)
Investigator-initiated clinical trials in the Czech Republic - overview for 2004-2007
Hořavová, L., Nebeská, K., Merhautová, J., Demlová, R., & Součková, L. (2019) · Klinická farmakologie a farmacie · doi:10.36290/far.2018.023
- Authors
- Wager, E.
- Corresponding author
- Wager, Elizabeth
- ORCID
- Wager, Elizabeth
- Venue
- Current Medical Research and Opinion
- Publisher
- Informa Healthcare
- Published
- 2004-01
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 203-206
- ISSN
- 0300-7995 (ISSN-L)
- 1473-4877
- OpenAlex
- W2163297625
- Cited by
- 13
- References
- 11
- Citations by year
- 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Current Medical Research and Opinion (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Keywords
- clinical trial registration, publication bias, duplicate publication, systematic reviews, meta-analysis, evidence-based recommendations
- MeSH terms
- Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, International Cooperation, Publishing, Duplicate Publications as Topic, Publication Bias, Evidence-Based Medicine, Ethics, Research
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
