Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 21

1.

Positive outcomes influence the rate and time to publication, but not the impact factor of publications of clinical trial results.

Suñé P, Suñé JM, Montoro JB.

PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e54583. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0054583. Epub 2013 Jan 30.

2.

Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases.

Song F, Parekh S, Hooper L, Loke YK, Ryder J, Sutton AJ, Hing C, Kwok CS, Pang C, Harvey I.

Health Technol Assess. 2010 Feb;14(8):iii, ix-xi, 1-193. doi: 10.3310/hta14080. Review.

3.

Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts.

Scherer RW, Langenberg P, von Elm E.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Apr 18;(2):MR000005. Review.

PMID:
17443628
4.

Publication bias in the medical literature: a review by a Canadian Research Ethics Board.

Hall R, de Antueno C, Webber A; Canadian Research Ethics Board.

Can J Anaesth. 2007 May;54(5):380-8. Review.

PMID:
17470890
5.

Full publication of clinical trials presented at a national maternal-fetal medicine meeting: is there a publication bias?

Blackwell SC, Thompson L, Refuerzo J.

Am J Perinatol. 2009 Oct;26(9):679-82. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1220786. Epub 2009 Apr 23. Review.

PMID:
19391085
6.

Time to full publication of studies of anti-cancer medicines for breast cancer and the potential for publication bias: a short systematic review.

Takeda A, Loveman E, Harris P, Hartwell D, Welch K.

Health Technol Assess. 2008 Oct;12(32):iii, ix-x, 1-46. Review.

7.

Subjective and objective outcomes in randomized clinical trials: definitions differed in methods publications and were often absent from trial reports.

Moustgaard H, Bello S, Miller FG, Hróbjartsson A.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Dec;67(12):1327-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.06.020. Epub 2014 Sep 26. Review.

PMID:
25263546
8.

Comparison of methodological quality of positive versus negative comparative studies published in Indian medical journals: a systematic review.

Charan J, Chaudhari M, Jackson R, Mhaskar R, Reljic T, Kumar A.

BMJ Open. 2015 Jun 24;5(6):e007853. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-007853. Review.

9.

Does Cancer Literature Reflect Multidisciplinary Practice? A Systematic Review of Oncology Studies in the Medical Literature Over a 20-Year Period.

Holliday EB, Ahmed AA, Yoo SK, Jagsi R, Hoffman KE.

Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015 Jul 15;92(4):721-31. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.03.011. Epub 2015 Mar 18. Review.

PMID:
26104927
10.

Publication and non-publication of drug trial results: a 10-year cohort of trials in Norwegian general practice.

Brænd AM, Straand J, Jakobsen RB, Klovning A.

BMJ Open. 2016 Apr 11;6(4):e010535. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010535. Review.

11.

Case reports and case series from Lancet had significant impact on medical literature.

Albrecht J, Meves A, Bigby M.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2005 Dec;58(12):1227-32. Epub 2005 Sep 12. Review.

PMID:
16291466
12.

Publication of sports medicine-related randomized controlled trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov.

Chahal J, Tomescu SS, Ravi B, Bach BR Jr, Ogilvie-Harris D, Mohamed NN, Gandhi R.

Am J Sports Med. 2012 Sep;40(9):1970-7. doi: 10.1177/0363546512448363. Epub 2012 Jun 7. Review.

PMID:
22679295
13.

Structured treatment interruptions (STI) in chronic unsuppressed HIV infection in adults.

Pai NP, Lawrence J, Reingold AL, Tulsky JP.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jul 19;(3):CD006148. Review.

PMID:
16856117
14.
15.

The significance of the trial outcome was associated with publication rate and time to publication.

Song SY, Koo DH, Jung SY, Kang W, Kim EY.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Apr;84:78-84. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.02.009. Epub 2017 Feb 24. Review.

PMID:
28238789
16.

Systematic review: Outcome reporting bias is a problem in high impact factor neurology journals.

Howard B, Scott JT, Blubaugh M, Roepke B, Scheckel C, Vassar M.

PLoS One. 2017 Jul 20;12(7):e0180986. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0180986. eCollection 2017. Review.

17.

Retrospective cohort study highlighted outcome reporting bias in UK publicly funded trials.

Matthews GA, Dumville JC, Hewitt CE, Torgerson DJ.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Dec;64(12):1317-24. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.03.013. Epub 2011 Sep 1. Review.

PMID:
21889307
18.

Bias in dissemination of clinical research findings: structured OPEN framework of what, who and why, based on literature review and expert consensus.

Bassler D, Mueller KF, Briel M, Kleijnen J, Marusic A, Wager E, Antes G, von Elm E, Altman DG, Meerpohl JJ; OPEN Consortium.

BMJ Open. 2016 Jan 21;6(1):e010024. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010024. Review.

19.

Scoring of medical publications with SIGAPS software: Application to orthopedics.

Rouvillain JL, Derancourt C, Moore N, Devos P.

Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2014 Nov;100(7):821-5. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2014.06.020. Epub 2014 Oct 14. Review.

20.

A novel use for the word "trend" in the clinical trial literature.

Desbiens NA.

Am J Med Sci. 2003 Aug;326(2):61-5. Review.

PMID:
12920436

Supplemental Content

Support Center