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
Comparative Study
. 2011 Jan 19;2011(1):MR000031.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000031.pub2.

Comparison of protocols and registry entries to published reports for randomised controlled trials

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of protocols and registry entries to published reports for randomised controlled trials

Kerry Dwan et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Publication of complete trial results is essential if people are to be able to make well-informed decisions about health care. Selective reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is a common problem.

Objectives: To systematically review studies of cohorts of RCTs to compare the content of trial reports with the information contained in their protocols, or entries in a trial registry.

Search strategy: We conducted electronic searches in Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to August 2010); Ovid EMBASE (1980 to August 2010); ISI Web of Science (1900 to August 2010) and the Cochrane Methodology Register (Issue 3, 2010), checked reference lists, and asked authors of eligible studies to identify further studies. Studies were not excluded based on language of publication or our assessment of their quality.

Selection criteria: Published or unpublished cohort studies comparing the content of protocols or trial registry entries with published trial reports.

Data collection and analysis: Data were extracted by two authors independently. Risk of bias in the cohort studies was assessed in relation to follow up and selective reporting of outcomes. Results are presented separately for the comparison of published reports to protocols and trial registry entries.

Main results: We included 16 studies assessing a median of 54 RCTs (range: 2 to 362). Twelve studies compared protocols to published reports and four compared trial registry entries to published reports. In two studies, eligibility criteria differed between the protocol and publication in 19% and 100% RCTs. In one study, 16% (9/58) of the reports included the same sample size calculation as the protocol. In one study, 6% (4/63) of protocol-report pairs gave conflicting information regarding the method of allocation concealment, and 67% (49/73) of blinded studies reported discrepant information on who was blinded. In one study unacknowledged discrepancies were found for methods of handling protocol deviations (44%; 19/43), missing data (80%; 39/49), primary outcome analyses (60%; 25/42) and adjusted analyses (82%; 23/28). One study found that of 13 protocols specifying subgroup analyses, 12 of these 13 trials reported only some, or none, of these. Two studies found that statistically significant outcomes had a higher odds of being fully reported compared to nonsignificant outcomes (range of odds ratios: 2.4 to 4.7). Across the studies, at least one primary outcome was changed, introduced, or omitted in 4-50% of trial reports.

Authors' conclusions: Discrepancies between protocols or trial registry entries and trial reports were common, although reasons for these were not discussed in the reports. Full transparency will be possible only when protocols are made publicly available or the quality and extent of information included in trial registries is improved, and trialists explain substantial changes in their reports.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Two of the authors of this review (PRW and DGA) are co‐authors of three studies included in the review (Hahn 2002; Chan 2004a; Chan 2004b).

Figures

1
1
PRISMA 2009 Flow Diagram

Update of

  • doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000031

References

References to studies included in this review

Al‐Marzouki 2008 {published data only}
    1. Al‐Marzouki S, Roberts I, Evans S, Marshall T. Selective reporting in clinical trials: analysis of trial protocols accepted by The Lancet. Lancet 2008;372(9634):201. - PubMed
Blumle 2008 {published data only}
    1. Blumle A, Antes G, Schumacher M, Just H, Elm E. Clinical research projects at a German medical faculty: follow‐up from ethical approval to publication and citation by others. Journal of Medical Ethics 2008;34:e20. - PubMed
    1. Blumle A, Meerpohl JJ, Antes G, Elm E. Reporting of eligibility criteria of participants in randomized trials: comparison between study protocols and journal articles [abstract]. 17th Cochrane Colloquium. Singapore, 2009:49‐50.
Bourgeois 2010 {published data only}
    1. Bourgeois FT, Murthy S, Mandl KD. Outcome Reporting Among Drug Trials Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov. Annals of Internal Medicine 2010;153:158‐166. - PMC - PubMed
Chan 2004a {published data only}
    1. Chan A‐W, Hrobjartsson A, Haahr MT, Gotzsche PC, Altman DG. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. Journal of the American Medical Association 2004a;291:2457‐65. - PubMed
    1. Chan AW, Altman D. Discrepancies between protocols and publications: evidence of outcome reporting bias in randomised trials [abstract]. XI Cochrane Colloquium: Evidence, Health Care and Culture. Barcelona, Spain, 2003:9.
    1. Chan AW, Hrobjartsson A, Jørgensen KJ, Gøtzsche PC, Altman DG. Discrepancies in sample size calculations and data analysesreported in randomised trials: comparison of publications with protocols. British Medical Journal 2008;337:a2299. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chan AW, Hrobjartsson A, Tendal B, Gotzsche P, Altman D. Pre‐specifying sample size calculations and statistical analyses in randomised trials: comparison of protocols to publications [abstract]. XIII Cochrane Colloquium. Melbourne, Australia, 2005:166.
    1. Gotzsche P, Hrobjartsson A, Hrobjartsonn A, Haahr M. Constraints on academic freedom in industry‐initiated clinical trials [abstract]. XIII Cochrane Colloquium. Melbourne, Australia, 2005:43.
Chan 2004b {published data only}
    1. Chan A‐W, Krleza‐Jeri K, Schmid I, Altman DG. Outcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2004;171:735‐40. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chan AW, Krleza‐Jeric K, Schmid I, Altman D. Outcome reporting bias in government‐funded RCTs (comments). Canadian Medical Association Journal 2005;172(7):857. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chan AW, Krleza‐Jeric K, Schmid I, Altman D. Selective reporting of results in government‐funded randomised trials [abstract]. 12th Cochrane Colloquium: Bridging the Gaps. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 2004:94‐95.
Charles 2009 {published data only}
    1. Charles P, Giraudeau B, Dechartres A, Baron G, Ravaud P. Reporting of sample size calculation in randomised controlled trials: review. British Medical Journal 2009;338:b1732. - PMC - PubMed
Ewart 2009 {published data only}
    1. Ewart R, Lausen H, Millian N. Undisclosed changes in outcomes in randomized controlled trials: an observational study. Annals of Family Medicine 2009;7(6):542‐6. - PMC - PubMed
Gandhi 2005 {published data only}
    1. Gandhi M, Ameli N, Bacchetti P, Sharp GB, French AL, Young M, Gange SJ, Anastos K, Holman S, Levine A, Greenblatt RM. Eligibility criteria for HIV clinical trials and generalizability of results: the gap between published reports and study protocols. AIDS 2005;19(16):1885‐96. - PubMed
Hahn 2002 {published data only}
    1. Hahn S, Williamson PR, Hutton JL. Investigation of within‐study selective reporting in clinical research: follow‐up of applications submitted to a local research ethics committee. Journal of Evaluations of Clinical Practice 2002;8:353‐9. - PubMed
Mathieu 2009 {published data only}
    1. Mathieu S, Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, Ravaud P. Comparison of registered and published primary outcomes in randomized controlled trials. Journal of theAMA 2009;302(9):977‐84. - PubMed
Pich 2003 {published data only}
    1. Pich J, Carne X, Arnaiz JA, Gomez B, Trilla A, Rodes J. Role of a research ethics committee in follow‐up and publication of results. Lancet 2003;361:1015‐6. - PubMed
Scharf 2006 {published data only}
    1. Scharf O, Colevas AD. Adverse event reporting in publications compared with sponsor database for cancer clinical trials. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2006;24(24):3933‐3938. - PubMed
Shapiro 2000 {published data only}
    1. Shapiro SH, Weijer C, Freedman B. Reporting the study populations of clinical trials: Clear transmission or static on the line?. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2000;53:973‐979. - PubMed
Soares 2004 {published data only}
    1. Soares HP, Daniels S, Kumar A, Clarke M, Scott C, Swann S, Djulbegovic B. Bad reporting does not mean bad methods for randomised trials: observational study of randomised controlled trials performed by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. British Medical Journal 2004;328:22‐25. - PMC - PubMed
Vedula 2009 {published data only}
    1. Vedula SS, Bero L, Scherer RW, Dickersin K. Outcome reporting in industry‐sponsored trials of gabapentin for off‐label use. New England Journal of Medicine 2009;361(20):1963‐71. - PubMed
    1. Vedula SS, Dickersin K. Reporting of trials of gabapentin. New England Journal of Medicine 2010;362(17):1641‐2. - PubMed
von Elm 2008 {published data only}
    1. Elm E, Rollin A, Blumle A, Senessie C, Low N, Egger M. Selective reporting of outcomes of drug trials? Comparison of study protocols and published articles [abstract]. XIV Cochrane Colloquium. Dublin, Ireland, 2006:47.
    1. Elm E, Röllin A, Blümle A, Huwiler K, Witschi M, Egger M. Publication and non‐publication of clinical trials: longitudinal study of applications submitted to a research ethics committee. Swiss Medical Weekly 2008;138:197‐203. - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Barcena 2005 {published data only}
    1. Barcena L, Pengel L, Morris PJ. Registry of randomized controlled trials in transplantation. Transplantation 2005;80(11):1525‐34. - PubMed
Bardy 1998 {published data only}
    1. Bardy AH. Bias in reporting clinical trials. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 1998;46:147‐50. - PMC - PubMed
Berlin 2005 {published data only}
    1. Berlin JA, Wacholtz MC. Selective reporting, publication bias and clinical trial registry: an industry perspective. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Medicine 2005;19(5‐6):277‐284.
Chan 2005 {published data only}
    1. Chan AW, Altman DG. Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors. British Medical Journal 2005;330(7494):753. - PMC - PubMed
Cooper 1997 {published data only}
    1. Cooper H, DeNeve K, Charlton K. Finding the missing science: the fate ofstudies submitted for review by a human subjects committee. Psychological Methods 1997;2(4):447‐452.
Cronin 2004 {published data only}
    1. Cronin E, Sheldon T. Factors influencing the publication of health research. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 2004;20:351‐5. - PubMed
Decullier 2005 {published data only}
    1. Decullier E, Lheritier V, Chapuis F. Fate of biomedical research protocolsand publication bias in France: retrospective cohort study. British Medical Journal 2005;331:19‐24. - PMC - PubMed
Decullier 2006 {published data only}
    1. Decullier E, Chapuis F. Impact of funding on biomedical research: aretrospective cohort study. BMC public health 2006;6:165. - PMC - PubMed
Decullier 2007 {published data only}
    1. Decullier E, Chapuis F. Oral presentation bias: a retrospective cohort study. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2007;61:190‐193. - PMC - PubMed
Dickersin 1992 {published data only}
    1. Dickersin K, Min YI, Meinert CL. Factors influencing publication of research results: follow up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards. Journal of the American Medical Association 1992;267:374‐8. - PubMed
Dickersin 1993 {published data only}
    1. Dickersin K, Min YI. NIH clinical trials and publication bias. Online Journal of Current Clinical Trials 1993;Doc No. 50(53). - PubMed
Djulbegovic 2008 {published data only}
    1. Djulbegovic B, Kumar A, Soares H, Hozo I, Bepler G, Clarke M, Bennett C. New cancer treatment successes identified in phase 3 randomised controlled trials conducted by the national cancer institute‐sponsored cooperative oncology groups. Archives of Internal Medicine 2008;168(6):632‐642. - PMC - PubMed
Easterbrook 1991 {published data only}
    1. Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR. Publication bias inclinical research. Lancet 1991;337:867‐72. - PubMed
Habibzadeh 2006 {published data only}
    1. Habibzadeh F. Impact of mandatory registration of clinical trials on small medical journals: scenario on emerging bias. Croatian Medical Journal 2006;47(1):181‐183. - PMC - PubMed
Haidich 2001 {published data only}
    1. Haidich AB, Ioannidis JP. Effect of early patient enrolment on the time to completion and publication of randomized controlled trials. American Journal of Epidemiology 2001;154:873‐80. - PubMed
Hall 2007 {published data only}
    1. Hall R, Antueno C, Webber A. Publication bias in the medical literature: A review by a Canadian Research Ethics Board. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia 2007;54(5):380‐388. - PubMed
Ioannidis 1998 {published data only}
    1. Ioannidis JPA. Effect of the statistical significance of results on the time to completion and publication of randomized efficacy trials. Journal of the American Medical Association 1998;279:281‐6. - PubMed
Lee 1998 {published data only}
    1. Lee HK, Lim KH, Park JH, Park KM, Kim HJ, Kim MY, Lee YS, Kim CJ, Chang JS, Shin SG. A survey of industrial perspectives on the Central Pharmaceutical Affairs Council's review of clinical trial protocols and study reports. Journal of Korean Society for Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics 1998;6(1):83‐100.
Liebeskind 1998 {published data only}
    1. Liebeskind DS, Kidwell CS, Saver JL. Empiric evidence of publication bias affecting acute stroke clinical trials. Stroke 1999;30(1):92. - PubMed
Liu 2008 {published data only}
    1. Liu XM, Li YP, Wu TX, Liu GJ, Li J. [A survey of the status of funding of registered Chinese trials]. Chinese Journal of Evidence‐based Medicine 2008;8(5):305‐311.
Melander 2003 {published data only}
    1. Melander H, Ahlqvist‐Rastad, Meijer G, Beermann B. Evidence b(i)ased medicine – selective reporting from studies sponsored by pharmaceutical industry: review of studies in new drug applications. British Medical Journal 2003;326:1171‐1173. - PMC - PubMed
Menzel 2007 {published data only}
    1. Menzel S, Uebing B, Hucklenbroich P, Schober O. Evaluation of clinicaltrials following an approval from a research ethics committee. Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift 2007;132(44):2313‐7. - PubMed
Nurbhai 2005 {published data only}
    1. Nurbhai M, Grimshaw J, Moja PL, Liberati A, Chan AW, Dickersin K, Krezla‐Jeric K, Moher D. Assessing the quality of information recorded on trial registries [abstract]. XIII Cochrane Colloquium. Melbourne, Australia, 2005:165.
Psaty 2008 {published data only}
    1. Psaty BM, Kronmal RA. Reporting mortality findings in trials of rofecoxib for alzheimer disease or cognitive impairment: a case study based on documents from rofecoxib litigation. Journal of the American Medical Association 2008;299(15):1813‐1817. - PubMed
Ramsey 2008 {published data only}
    1. Ramsey S, Scoggins J. Commentary: practicing on the tip of an information iceberg? Evidence of underpublication of registered clinical trials in oncology. Oncologist 2008;13(9):925‐9. - PMC - PubMed
Rasmussen 2009 {published data only}
    1. Rasmussen N, Lee K, Bero L. Association of trial registration with the results and conclusions of published trials of new oncology drugs. Trials 2009;10:116. - PMC - PubMed
Rising 2008 {published data only}
    1. Rising K, Bacchetti, Bero L. Reporting bias in drug trials submitted to the food and drug administration: review of publication and presentation. PLoS Medicine 2008;5(11):e217. - PMC - PubMed
Ross 2009 {published data only}
    1. Ross JS, Mulvey GK, Hines EM, Nissen SE, Krumholz HM. Trial publication after registration in ClinicalTrials.Gov: a cross‐sectional analysis. PLoS Medicine 2009;6(9):e1000144. - PMC - PubMed
Simes 1986 {published data only}
    1. Simes RJ. Publication bias: the case for an international registry of clinical trials. Journal of Clinical Oncology 1986;4(10):1529‐1541. - PubMed
Stern 1997 {published data only}
    1. Stern JM, Simes RJ. Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects. British Medical Journal 1997;315(7109):640‐645. - PMC - PubMed
Turner 2008 {published data only}
    1. Turner EH, Matthews AM, Linardatos E, Tell RA, Rosenthal R. Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy. New England Journal of Medicine 2008;358(3):252‐60. - PubMed

References to studies awaiting assessment

Chappell 2005 {published data only}
    1. Chappell L, Alfirevich Z, Chien P, Jarvis S, Thornton JG. A comparison of the published version of randomized controlled trials in a specialist clinical journal with the original trial protocols [abstract]. International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication. Chicago, Illinois, USA, 2005:27.
Djulbegovic 2009 {published data only}
    1. Djulbegovic B, Kumar A, Magazin A, Soares HP. Quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTS) in hematological malignancies: What was reported versus what was done. Haematologica Conference: 14th Congress of the European Hematology Association. Berlin, Germany, 2009.
Djulbegovic 2010 {published data only}
    1. Djulbegovic B, Kumar A, Magazin A, Schroen AT, Soares H, Hozo I, Clarke M, Sargent DJ, Schell MJ. Optimisim bias leads to inconclusive results ‐ an empirical study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2010 in press. - PMC - PubMed
Ghersi 2006 {unpublished data only}
    1. Ghersi D. Issues in the design, conduct and reporting of clinical trials that impact on the quality of decision making. School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine. University of Sydney 2006.
    1. Ghersi D, Clarke M, Simes J. Selective reporting of the primary outcomes of clinical trials: a follow‐up study [abstract]. XIV Cochrane Colloquium. Dublin, Ireland, 2006.
Jureidini 2008 {published data only}
    1. Jureidini JN, McHenry LB, Mansfield PR. Clinical trials and drug promotion: Selective reporting of study 329. International Journal of Risk & Safety in Medicine 2008;20:73‐81.
Mhaskar 2009 {published data only}
    1. Mhaskar R, Kumar A, Soares H, Gardner B, Djulbegovic B. Treatment related harms: what was planned and what was reported? An analysis of Southwest Oncology Group phase III trials [abstract]. 17th Cochrane Colloquium. Singapore, 2009:49.
Smyth 2010 {published data only}
    1. Smyth RMD, Jacoby A, Altman DG, Gamble C, Kirkham JJ, Williamson PR. Frequency and reasons for outcome reporting bias in clinical trials: interviews with trialists. BMJ 2010 in press. - PMC - PubMed
You 2010 {published data only}
    1. You B, Gan HK, Pond GR, Chen EX. Consistency in reporting of primary endpoints (PEP) from registration to publication for modern randomized oncology phase lll trials. American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2010:454s. - PubMed

References to ongoing studies

Chan 2010 {unpublished data only}
    1. personal communication.
McKenzie 2010 {unpublished data only}
    1. personal communication.
Rasmussen 2010 {unpublished data only}
    1. personal communication.
Urrutia 2010 {unpublished data only}
    1. personal communication.

Additional references

Chan 2004a
    1. Chan A‐W, Hrobjartsson A, Haahr MT, Gotzsche PC, Altman DG. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. Journal of the American Medical Association 2004;291:2457‐65. - PubMed
Chan 2008a
    1. Chan AW. Bias, spin and misreporting: time for full access to trial protocols and results. PLoS Medicine 2008;5(11):e230. - PMC - PubMed
Chan 2008b
    1. Chan A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Gotzsche P, Hrobjartsson A, Krleza‐Jeric K, Laupacis A, Moher D. The SPIRIT initiative: defining standard protocol items for randomised trials. 16th Cochrane Colloquium, Freiburg, Germany (3‐7 October, 2008). German Journal for Evidence and Quality in Health Care. 2008; Vol. 102(Suppl VI):S27.
Chan 2008c
    1. Chan A‐W, Hrobjartsson A, Jorgensen KJ, Gotzsche PC, Altman DG. Discrepancies in sample size calculations and data analyses reported in randomised trials: comparison of publications with protocols. British Medical Journal 2008;337:a2299. - PMC - PubMed
De Angelis 2004
    1. Angelis C, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA, Haug C, Hoey J, Horton R, et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Lancet 2004;364:911‐2. - PubMed
Dickersin 1987
    1. Dickersin K, Chan S, Chalmers TC, Sacks HS, Smith H Jr. Publication bias and clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 1987;8:343‐53. - PubMed
Dwan 2008
    1. Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA, Bloom J, Chan A‐W, Cronin E, et al. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS ONE 2008;3:e3081. - PMC - PubMed
Ghersi 2009
    1. Ghersi D, Pang T. From Mexico to Mali: four years in thehistory of clinical trial registration. Journal of Evidence Based Medicine 2009;2(1):1‐7. - PubMed
Gøtzsche 2006
    1. Gøtzsche PC, Hrobjartsson A, Johansen KJ, Haahr MT, Altman DG, Chan AW. Constraints on Publication Rights in Industry‐Initiated Clinical Trials. Journal of the American Medical Association 2006;295(14):1645‐6. - PubMed
Gøtzsche 2007
    1. Gøtzsche PC, Hrobjartsson A, Johansen HK, Haahr MT, Altman DG, Chan AW. Ghost Authorship in Industry‐Initiated Randomised Trials. PLoS Medicine 2007;4(1):e19. - PMC - PubMed
Hahn 2000
    1. Hahn S, Williamson PR, Hutton JL, Garner P, Flynn EV. Assessing the potential for bias in meta‐analysis due to selective reporting of subgroup analyses within studies. Statistics in Medicine 2000;19:3325‐36. - PubMed
Hopewell 2009
    1. 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 of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000006.pub3] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Hrobjartsson 2009
    1. Hrobjartsson A, Pildal J, Chan AW, Haahr MT, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC. Reporting on blinding in trial protocols and corresponding publications was often inadequate but rarely contradictory. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2009;62(967):e973. - PubMed
Hutton 2000
    1. Hutton JL, Williamson PR. Bias in meta‐analysis due to outcome variable selection within studies. Applied Statistics 2000;49:359‐70.
Kirkham 2010
    1. Kirkham JJ, Dwan KM, Altman DG, Gamble C, Dodd S, Smyth RMD, Williamson PR. The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews. British Medical Journal 2010;340:c365. - PubMed
Moja 2009
    1. Moja LP, Moschetti I, Nurbhai M, Compagnoni A, Liberati A, Grimshaw JM, Chan AW, Dickersin K, Krleza‐Jeric K, Moher D, Sim I, Volmink J. Compliance of clinical trial registries with the World Health Organization minimum data set: a survey. Trials 2009;10(56). - PMC - PubMed
Pildal 2005
    1. Pildal J, Chan AW, Hróbjartsson A, Forfang E, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC. Comparison of descriptions of allocation concealment in trial protocols and the published reports: cohort study. British Medical Journal 2005;330:1049‐52. - PMC - PubMed
Schulz 2010
    1. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, for the CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomised Trials. PLoS Medicine 2010;7(3):e1000251. - PMC - PubMed
Simes 1986
    1. Simes RJ. Publication bias: the case for an international registry of clinical trials. Journal of Clinical Oncology 1986;4:1529‐41. - PubMed
Tannock 1996
    1. Tannock IF. False‐positive results in clinical trials: multiple significance tests and the problem of unreported comparisons. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 1996;88:206‐7. - PubMed
Wang 2007
    1. Wang R, Lagakos SW, Ware JH, Hunter DJ, Drazen JM. Statistics in medicine — Reporting of subgroup analyses in clinical trials. New England Journal of Medicine 2007;357(21):2189‐2194. - PubMed
WHO 2006
    1. World Health Organization. World Health Organization international clinical trials registry platform. New standards for registration of human medical research. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2006/pr25/en/ (Accessed 27 October 2010) 2006.
Williamson 2005a
    1. Williamson PR, Gamble C. Identification and impact of outcome selection bias in meta‐analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2005;24:1547‐61. - PubMed
Williamson 2005b
    1. Williamson PR, Gamble C, Altman DG, Hutton JL. Outcome selection bias in meta‐analysis. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2005;14:515‐24. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources