Abstracts of Randomized Controlled Trials Presented at the Society for Pediatric Research Meeting: An Example of Publication Bias
Open Access
- 1 May 2002
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Medical Association (AMA) in Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine
- Vol. 156 (5) , 474-479
- https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.156.5.474
Abstract
Background Publication bias toward studies that favor new therapies has been known to occur for the past 40 years, yet its implications are not well studied in child health. The increased interest in meta-analyses has highlighted the need to identify the totality of evidence when addressing treatment questions. Objectives To measure the percentage of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) presented at a major pediatric scientific meeting that were subsequently published as full-length articles, to investigate factors associated with publication, and to describe the variables that change from abstract to manuscript form. Design The scientific proceedings from the Society for Pediatric Research were hand searched for RCTs (1992-1995). Subsequent publication was ascertained through a search of various electronic databases. Quality of abstracts and manuscripts was measured, and data were extracted using a structured form. Results A total of 264 (59.1%) of 447 abstracts were subsequently published. Almost 64% of RCTs that were subsequently published favored new therapy compared with 43.5% of studies that were never published (P<.001). Mean effect size for published vs unpublished RCTs was 0.74 vs 0.05 (P<.001). Median sample size was larger in published (n = 45) vs unpublished (n = 34) RCTs (P= .02). Quality was significantly lower for abstracts vs published RCTs (P<.001). For 5% of abstracts that were subsequently published, the conclusion regarding treatment efficacy changed. Conclusions Publication bias is a serious threat to assessing the effectiveness of interventions in child health, as little more than half of RCTs presented at a major scientific meeting are subsequently published. There is a need to institute an international registry of RCTs in children so that the totality of evidence can be accessed when assessing treatment effectiveness.Keywords
This publication has 9 references indexed in Scilit:
- A comparison of methods to detect publication bias in meta‐analysisStatistics in Medicine, 2001
- Does the inclusion of grey literature influence estimates of intervention effectiveness reported in meta-analyses?Published by Elsevier ,2000
- Publication bias in reproductive research.Human Reproduction, 2000
- Empirical assessment of effect of publication bias on meta-analysesBMJ, 2000
- Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical testBMJ, 1997
- Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?Controlled Clinical Trials, 1996
- Meta-analysis of screening and diagnostic tests.Psychological Bulletin, 1995
- Publication bias in clinical researchThe Lancet, 1991
- Publication bias: the case for an international registry of clinical trials.Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1986