Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2013

Open Access 01-12-2013 | Protocol

Protocol for a systematic review on the extent of non-publication of research studies and associated study characteristics

Authors: Susan Portalupi, Erik von Elm, Christine Schmucker, Britta Lang, Edith Motschall, Guido Schwarzer, Isabel T Gross, Roberta W Scherer, Dirk Bassler, Joerg J Meerpohl

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Methodological research has found that non-published studies often have different results than those that are published, a phenomenon known as publication bias. When results are not published, or are published selectively based on the direction or the strength of the findings, healthcare professionals and consumers of healthcare cannot base their decision-making on the full body of current evidence.

Methods

As part of the OPEN project (http://​www.​open-project.​eu) we will conduct a systematic review with the following objectives:
1.
To determine the proportion and/or rate of non-publication of studies by systematically reviewing methodological research projects that followed up a cohort of studies that
a.
received research ethics committee (REC) approval,
 
b.
were registered in trial registries, or
 
c.
were presented as abstracts at conferences.
 
 
2.
To assess the association of study characteristics (for example, direction and/or strength of findings) with likelihood of full publication.
 
To identify reports of relevant methodological research projects we will conduct electronic database searches, check reference lists, and contact experts. Published and unpublished projects will be included. The inclusion criteria are as follows:
a.
RECs: methodological research projects that examined the subsequent proportion and/or rate of publication of studies that received approval from RECs;
 
b.
Trial registries: methodological research projects that examine the subsequent proportion and/or rate of publication of studies registered in trial registries;
 
c.
Conference abstracts: methodological research projects that examine the subsequent proportion and/or rate of full publication of studies which were initially presented at conferences as abstracts.
 
Primary outcomes: Proportion/rate of published studies; time to full publication (mean/median; cumulative publication rate by time).
Secondary outcomes: Association of study characteristics with full publication.
The different questions (a, b, and c) will be investigated separately. Data synthesis will involve a combination of descriptive and statistical summaries of the included methodological research projects.

Discussion

Results are expected to be publicly available in mid 2013.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Ross JS, Mulvey GK, Hines EM, Nissen SE, Krumholz HM: Trial publication after registration in ClinicalTrials.Gov: a cross-sectional analysis. PLoS Med. 2009, 6: e1000144-10.1371/journal.pmed.1000144.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ross JS, Mulvey GK, Hines EM, Nissen SE, Krumholz HM: Trial publication after registration in ClinicalTrials.Gov: a cross-sectional analysis. PLoS Med. 2009, 6: e1000144-10.1371/journal.pmed.1000144.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
go back to reference Scherer RW, Dickersin K, Langenberg P: Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. A meta-analysis. JAMA. 1994, 272: 158-162. 10.1001/jama.1994.03520020084025.CrossRefPubMed Scherer RW, Dickersin K, Langenberg P: Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. A meta-analysis. JAMA. 1994, 272: 158-162. 10.1001/jama.1994.03520020084025.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Scholey JM, Harrison JE: Delay and failure to publish dental research. Evid Based Dent. 2005, 6: 58-61. 10.1038/sj.ebd.6400347.CrossRefPubMed Scholey JM, Harrison JE: Delay and failure to publish dental research. Evid Based Dent. 2005, 6: 58-61. 10.1038/sj.ebd.6400347.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Gandhi R, Jan M, Smith HN, Mahomed NN, Bhandari M: Comparison of published orthopaedic trauma trials following registration in Clinicaltrials.gov. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011, 12: 278-10.1186/1471-2474-12-278.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gandhi R, Jan M, Smith HN, Mahomed NN, Bhandari M: Comparison of published orthopaedic trauma trials following registration in Clinicaltrials.gov. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011, 12: 278-10.1186/1471-2474-12-278.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Dickersin K, Chan S, Chalmers TC, Sacks HS, Smith H: Publication bias and clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1987, 8: 343-353. 10.1016/0197-2456(87)90155-3.CrossRefPubMed Dickersin K, Chan S, Chalmers TC, Sacks HS, Smith H: Publication bias and clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1987, 8: 343-353. 10.1016/0197-2456(87)90155-3.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA, Bloom J, Chan AW, Cronin E, Decullier E, Easterbrook PJ, Von Elm E, Gamble C, Ghersi D, Ionnidis JP, Simes J, Williamson PR: Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS One. 2008, 3: e3081-10.1371/journal.pone.0003081.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA, Bloom J, Chan AW, Cronin E, Decullier E, Easterbrook PJ, Von Elm E, Gamble C, Ghersi D, Ionnidis JP, Simes J, Williamson PR: Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS One. 2008, 3: e3081-10.1371/journal.pone.0003081.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Rosenthal R: The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychol Bull. 1979, 86: 638-641.CrossRef Rosenthal R: The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychol Bull. 1979, 86: 638-641.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Dickersin K, Min YI: Publication bias: the problem that won’t go away. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1993, 703: 135-146. 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1993.tb26343.x. discussion 146–138CrossRefPubMed Dickersin K, Min YI: Publication bias: the problem that won’t go away. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1993, 703: 135-146. 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1993.tb26343.x. discussion 146–138CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Ioannidis JP: Effect of the statistical significance of results on the time to completion and publication of randomized efficacy trials. JAMA. 1998, 279: 281-286. 10.1001/jama.279.4.281.CrossRefPubMed Ioannidis JP: Effect of the statistical significance of results on the time to completion and publication of randomized efficacy trials. JAMA. 1998, 279: 281-286. 10.1001/jama.279.4.281.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Hopewell S, Loudon K, Clarke MJ, Oxman AD, Dickersin K: Publication bias in clinical trials due to statistical significance or direction of trial results. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009, 1: MR000006-PubMed Hopewell S, Loudon K, Clarke MJ, Oxman AD, Dickersin K: Publication bias in clinical trials due to statistical significance or direction of trial results. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009, 1: MR000006-PubMed
11.
go back to reference Hopewell S, McDonald S, Clarke M, Egger M: Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007, 2: MR000010-PubMed Hopewell S, McDonald S, Clarke M, Egger M: Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007, 2: MR000010-PubMed
12.
go back to reference Scherer RW, Langenberg P, von Elm E: Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007, 2: MR000005-PubMed Scherer RW, Langenberg P, von Elm E: Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007, 2: MR000005-PubMed
13.
go back to reference Song F, Parekh-Bhurke S, Hooper L, Loke YK, Ryder JJ, Sutton AJ, Hing CB, Harvey I: Extent of publication bias in different categories of research cohorts: a meta-analysis of empirical studies. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009, 9: 79-10.1186/1471-2288-9-79.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Song F, Parekh-Bhurke S, Hooper L, Loke YK, Ryder JJ, Sutton AJ, Hing CB, Harvey I: Extent of publication bias in different categories of research cohorts: a meta-analysis of empirical studies. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009, 9: 79-10.1186/1471-2288-9-79.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Song F, Parekh S, Hooper L, Loke YK, Ryder J, Sutton AJ, Hing C, Kwok CS, Pang C, Harvey I: Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases. Health Technol Assess. 2010, 14: 1-193. ii, ix-xiCrossRef Song F, Parekh S, Hooper L, Loke YK, Ryder J, Sutton AJ, Hing C, Kwok CS, Pang C, Harvey I: Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases. Health Technol Assess. 2010, 14: 1-193. ii, ix-xiCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Sterne JA, Sutton AJ, Ioannidis JP, Terrin N, Jones DR, Lau J, Carpenter J, Rucker G, Harbord RM, Schmid CH, Tetzlaff J, Deeks JJ, Peters J, Macaskill P, Schwarzer G, Duval S, Altman DG, Moher D, Higgins JP: Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2011, 343: d4002-10.1136/bmj.d4002.CrossRefPubMed Sterne JA, Sutton AJ, Ioannidis JP, Terrin N, Jones DR, Lau J, Carpenter J, Rucker G, Harbord RM, Schmid CH, Tetzlaff J, Deeks JJ, Peters J, Macaskill P, Schwarzer G, Duval S, Altman DG, Moher D, Higgins JP: Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2011, 343: d4002-10.1136/bmj.d4002.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Protocol for a systematic review on the extent of non-publication of research studies and associated study characteristics
Authors
Susan Portalupi
Erik von Elm
Christine Schmucker
Britta Lang
Edith Motschall
Guido Schwarzer
Isabel T Gross
Roberta W Scherer
Dirk Bassler
Joerg J Meerpohl
Publication date
01-12-2013
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2013
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2013

Systematic Reviews 1/2013 Go to the issue