Background: Researchers conducting trials have a responsibility to publish the results of their work in a peer-reviewed journal, and failure to do so may introduce bias that affects the accuracy of available evidence. Moreover, failure to publish results constitutes research waste.
Objectives: To systematically review research reports that followed clinical trials from their inception and their investigated publication rates and time to publication. We also aimed to assess whether certain factors influenced publication and time to publication.
Search Methods: We identified studies by searching MEDLINE, Embase, Epistemonikos, the Cochrane Methodology Register (CMR) and the database of the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), from inception to 23 August 2023. We also checked reference lists of relevant studies and contacted experts in the field for any additional studies.
Selection Criteria: Studies were eligible if they tracked the publication of a cohort of clinical trials and contained analyses of any aspect of the publication rate or time to publication of these trials.
Data Collection And Analysis: Two review authors performed data extraction independently. We extracted data on the prevalence of publication and the time from the trial start date or completion date to publication. We also extracted data from the clinical trials included in the research reports, including country of the study's first author, area of health care, means by which the publication status of these trials were sought and the risk of bias in the trials.
Main Results: A total of 204 research reports tracking 165,135 trials met the inclusion criteria. Just over half (53%) of these trials were published in full. The median time to publication was approximately 4.8 years from the enrolment of the first trial participant and 2.1 years from the trial completion date. Trials with positive results (i.e. statistically significant results favouring the experimental arm) were more likely to be published than those with negative or null results (OR 2.69, 95% CI 2.02 to 3.60; 19 studies), and they were published in a shorter time (adjusted HR 1.92, 95% CI 1.51 to 2.45; 4 studies). On average, trials with positive results took 2 years to publish, whereas trials with negative or null results took 2.6 years. Large trials were more likely to be published than smaller ones (adjusted OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.77; 11 studies), and they were published in a shorter time (adjusted HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.68; 7 studies). Multicentre trials were more likely to be published than single-centre trials (adjusted OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.40; 2 studies). We found no difference between multicentre and single-centre trials in time to publication. Trials funded by non-industry sources (e.g.governments or universities) were more likely to be published than trials funded by industry (e.g. pharmaceutical companies or for-profit organisations) (adjusted OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.82 to 2.49; 14 studies); they were also published in a shorter time (adjusted HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.86; 7 studies).
Authors' Conclusions: Our updated review shows that trial publication is poor, with only half of all trials that are conducted being published. Factors that may make publication more likely and lead to faster publication are positive results, large sample size and being funded by non-industry sources. Differences in publication rates result in publication bias and time-lag bias that may influence findings and therefore ultimately affect treatment decisions. Systematic review authors should consider the possibility of time-lag bias when conducting a systematic review, especially when updating their review.
Funding: This Cochrane review had no dedicated funding.
Registration: This review combines and updates two earlier Cochrane reviews. The two protocols and previous versions of the two updated reviews are available via 10.1002/14651858.MR000006 and 10.1002/14651858.MR000006.pub3 and 10.1002/14651858.MR000011 and 10.1002/14651858.MR000011.pub2.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11600493 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000011.pub3 | DOI Listing |
Trials
December 2024
Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Background: Vancomycin, an antibiotic with activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), is frequently included in empiric treatment for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) despite the fact that MRSA is rarely implicated in CAP. Conducting polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing on nasal swabs to identify the presence of MRSA colonization has been proposed as an antimicrobial stewardship intervention to reduce the use of vancomycin. Observational studies have shown reductions in vancomycin use after implementation of MRSA colonization testing, and this approach has been adopted by CAP guidelines.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEur J Med Res
December 2024
Department of Nephrology, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Background: The involvement of microRNA-668 (miR-668) in the onset and progression of renal fibrosis remains unclear. To this end, we aimed to explore the relevant mechanism of miR-668 in renal fibrosis.
Methods: C57BL/6 J male mice were randomly divided into sham-operated, unilateral ureteral obstruction (UUO), and UUO-fenofibrate groups.
Parasit Vectors
December 2024
United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville Agricultural Research Centre, Animal Parasitic Diseases Laboratory, Beltsville, MD, 20705-2350, USA.
Background: Parasites in the apicomplexan genus Sarcocystis infect cattle worldwide. Assessing the economic importance of each such parasite species requires proper diagnosis. Sarcocystis cruzi, a thin-walled species, infects virtually all cattle.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFTrials
December 2024
Department of Cardiology, The Heart Centre, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Background: Intermediate-high risk pulmonary embolism (PE) carries a significant risk of hemodynamic deterioration or death. Treatment should balance efficacy in reducing clot burden with the risk of complications, particularly bleeding. Previous studies on high-dose, short-term thrombolysis with alteplase (rtPA) showed a reduced risk of hemodynamic deterioration but no change in mortality and increased bleeding complications.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBMC Med Educ
December 2024
Department of Orthopedics, Guru Gobind Singh Medical College and Hospital, Faridkot, Punjab, 151203, India.
Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI), characterized by its ability to generate diverse forms of content including text, images, video and audio, has revolutionized many fields, including medical education. Generative AI leverages machine learning to create diverse content, enabling personalized learning, enhancing resource accessibility, and facilitating interactive case studies. This narrative review explores the integration of generative artificial intelligence (AI) into orthopedic education and training, highlighting its potential, current challenges, and future trajectory.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!