+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects

Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects

BMJ 315(7109): 640-645

To determine the extent to which publication is influenced by study outcome. A cohort of studies submitted to a hospital ethics committee over 10 years were examined retrospectively by reviewing the protocols and by questionnaire. The primary method of analysis was Cox's proportional hazards model. University hospital, Sydney, Australia. 748 eligible studies submitted to Royal Prince Alfred Hospital Ethics Committee between 1979 and 1988. Time to publication. Response to the questionnaire was received for 520 (70%) of the eligible studies. Of the 218 studies analysed with tests of significance, those with positive results (P < 0.05) were much more likely to be published than those with negative results (P > or = 0.10) (hazard ratio 2.32 (95% confidence interval 1.47 to 3.66), P = 0.0003), with a significantly shorter time to publication (median 4.8 v 8.0 years). This finding was even stronger for the group of 130 clinical trials (hazard ratio 3.13 (1.76 to 5.58). P = 0.0001), with median times to publication of 4.7 and 8.0 years respectively. These results were not materially changed after adjusting for other significant predictors of publication. Studies with indefinite conclusions (0.05 < or = P < 0.10) tended to have an even lower publication rate and longer time to publication than studies with negative results (hazard ratio 0.39 (0.13 to 1.12), P = 0.08). For the 103 studies in which outcome was rated qualitatively, there was no clear cut evidence of publication bias, although the number of studies in this group was not large. This study confirms the evidence of publication bias found in other studies and identifies delay in publication as an additional important factor. The study results support the need for prospective registration of trials to avoid publication bias and also support restricting the selection of trials to those started before a common date in undertaking systematic reviews.

Please choose payment method:

(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 047128685

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 9310565

Related references

Publication bias in clinical research: outcome of projects submitted to ethics committees. Nestle Nutrition Workshop Series 40: 105-119, 1998

The specter of publication bias: adjustment for publication bias in the evidence on cardiac death associated with passive smoking in nonsmoking women. International Journal of Cardiology 149(3): 388-389, 2011

Non-publication and publication bias in reproductive medicine: a cohort analysis. Human Reproduction 32(8): 1658-1666, 2018

Review of publication bias in studies on publication bias: mandatory publication of data may help. BMJ 331(7517): 638-638, 2005

Communication of research findings in peer-reviewed journals Publication bias, timing of publication, conflicting interests and fraud. Science of the Total Environment 184(1-2): 129-130, 1996

Full publication of clinical trials presented at a national maternal-fetal medicine meeting: is there a publication bias?. American Journal of Perinatology 26(9): 679-682, 2010

Review of publication bias in studies on publication bias: studies on publication bias are probably susceptible to the bias they study. BMJ 331(7517): 637-638, 2005

Publication probability of a study on odds ratio value circumstantial evidence for publication bias in medical study areas. Tokai Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine 19(1-2): 29-37, 1994

Examining publication bias-a simulation-based evaluation of statistical tests on publication bias. Peerj 5: E4115, 2017

The relationship between study findings and publication outcome in anesthesia research: a retrospective observational study examining publication bias. Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 63(6): 682-690, 2017

Fate of biomedical research protocols and publication bias in France: retrospective cohort study. BMJ 331(7507): 19, 2005

Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 337(8746): 867-872, 1991

Publication bias in the clinical drug research. Duodecim; Laaketieteellinen Aikakauskirja 115(17): 1828-1832, 2002

Publication bias and dissemination of clinical research. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 81(2): 107-115, 1989

Publication and non-publication of clinical trials: longitudinal study of applications submitted to a research ethics committee. Swiss Medical Weekly 138(13-14): 197-203, 2008