Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 Apr 18;2007(2):MR000011.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000011.pub2.

Time to publication for results of clinical trials

S Hopewell  1 , M Clarke, L Stewart, J Tierney
Affiliations

Time to publication for results of clinical trials

S Hopewell et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Update in

  • Time to publication for results of clinical trials.
    Showell MG, Cole S, Clarke MJ, DeVito NJ, Farquhar C, Jordan V. Showell MG, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Nov 27;11(11):MR000011. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000011.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024. PMID: 39601300

Abstract

Background: It has been suggested that a time-lag bias exists whereby research studies with striking results are more likely to be stopped earlier than originally planned, published quicker, or both. If time-lag bias exists, new interventions might be mistakenly assumed to be effective.

Objectives: To study the extent to which time to publication of a clinical trial is influenced by the significance of its result.

Search strategy: Studies were identified by searching the Cochrane Methodology Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2005), EMBASE (1980 to May 2005), Science Citation Index (June 2005) and by handsearching journals and conference abstracts.

Selection criteria: Studies were eligible if they contained analyses of any aspect of the time to publication of clinical trials and tracked the publication of a cohort of clinical trials.

Data collection and analysis: Data extraction was performed independently by two authors. Data were extracted on the median time from the date the trial started to the date of publication. Data were also extracted on source of trials under investigation; source of funding; area of health care; means by which the publication status of these trials were sought; and methodological quality of the empirical study.

Main results: Two studies with a total of 196 trials met the inclusion criteria. In both studies just over half of all trials had been published in full. Trials with positive results (i.e. statistically significant in favour of the experimental arm) were published in approximately 4 to 5 years. Trials with null or negative results (i.e. not statistically significant or statistically significant in favour of the control arm) were published after about 6 to 8 years. One study suggested that this difference could, in part, be attributed to the length of time taken to publish the results of a trial once follow up has been completed. This study showed that trials with null or negative findings took, on average, just over a year longer to be published than those with positive results.

Authors' conclusions: Our review shows that trials with positive results are published sooner than other trials. This has important implications for the timing of the initiation and updating of a review, especially if there is an association between the inclusion of a trial in a review and its publication status. It is of particular concern when one considers reviews containing only a small number of studies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None.

References

References to studies included in this review

Ioannidis 1998 {published data only}
    1. Ioannidis J. Effect of the statistical significance of results on the time to completion and publication of randomised efficacy trials. JAMA 1998;279:281‐6. - PubMed
Stern 1997 {published data only}
    1. Stern J, Simes J. Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects. BMJ 1997;315:640‐5. - PMC - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Burrett 2003 {published and unpublished data}
    1. Burdett J. Identification of randomized trials for inclusion in meta‐analyses of treatments for childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia, and investigation of factors leading to publication bias. PhD thesis, Open University, UK, 2003.
Cronin 2004 {published and unpublished data}
    1. Cronin E, Sheldon T. Factors influencing the publication of health research. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 2004;20(3):351‐5. - PubMed
Liebeskind 1999 {published data only}
    1. Liebeskind DS, Kindwell CS, Saver JL. Empirical evidence of publication bias affecting acute stroke clincal trials. Stroke 1999;30:268.
Misakian 1998 {published data only}
    1. Misakian A, Bero L. Publication bias and research on passive smoking. JAMA 1998;280:250‐3. - PubMed
Simes 1987 {published data only}
    1. Simes, J. Confronting publication bias: a cohort design for meta‐analysis. Statistics in Medicine 1987;6:11‐29. - PubMed

References to studies awaiting assessment

Decullier 2005 {published data only}
    1. Decullier E, Lheritier V, Chapuis F. Fate of biomedical research protocols and publication bias in France: retrospective cohort study. BMJ 2005;331:19‐22. - PMC - PubMed

References to ongoing studies

Clarke {unpublished data only}
    1. Publication bias in randomized trials funded by the MRC.. Ongoing study April 1999: Work has started on this study but is currently on hold due to resource issues..

Additional references

Bardy 1998
    1. Bardy AH. Bias in reporting clinical trials. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 1998;46:147‐50. - PMC - PubMed
Clarke 1994
    1. Clarke MJ, Stewart LA. Obtaining data from randomised controlled trials: how much do we need to perform reliable and informative meta‐analyses?. BMJ 1994;309:1007‐10. - PMC - PubMed
Clarke 1998
    1. Clarke M, Stewart L. Time lag bias in publishing clinical trials. JAMA 1998;279:1952. - PubMed
Dickersin 1992
    1. Dickersin K, Min Yi, Meinert CL. Factors influencing publication of research results: follow‐up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards. JAMA 1992;263:274‐8. - PubMed
Dickersin 1993
    1. Dickersin K, Min Yi. NIH clinical trials and publication bias. Online Journal of Current Clinical Trials (serial online) 1993, (Doc‐No 50). - PubMed
Dickersin 1997
    1. Dickersin K. How important is publication bias? a synthesis of available data. AIDS Education and Prevention 1997;9:15‐21. - PubMed
Easterbrook 1991
    1. Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 1991;337:867‐72. - PubMed
Haidich 2001
    1. Haidich AB, Ioannidis JPA. Effect of early patient enrollment on the time to completion and publication of randomized controlled trials. American Journal of Epidemiology 2001;154(9):873‐80. - PubMed
Hopewell 2001
    1. Hopewell S. The enhanced Cochrane Methodology Register. The Cochrane Collaboration Methods Groups Newsletter June 2001;5:8‐9.
Jadad 1998
    1. Jadad A, Rennie D. The randomized controlled trial gets a middle‐aged check‐up. JAMA 1998;279:319‐20. - PubMed
Scherer 2007
    1. Scherer RW, Langenberg P, Elm E. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000005.pub2] - DOI - PubMed
Song 2000
    1. Song F, Eastwood AJ, Gilbody S, Duley L, Sutton AJ. Publication and related biases. Health Technology Assessment 2000;4(10):1‐115. - PubMed
Tierney 2000
    1. Tierney J, Clarke M, Stewart L. Bias in the publication of IPD meta‐analysis. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 2000;16(2):657‐67. - PubMed
Wormald 1997
    1. Wormald R, Bloom J, Evans J, Oldfield K. Publication bias in eye trials. 5th Annual Cochrane Colloquium, Amsterdam, October 1997.

Publication types