Intended for healthcare professionals

  1. Research
  2. Identifying outcome...
  3. Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors
Papers

Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors

BMJ 2005; 330 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38356.424606.8F (Published 31 March 2005) Cite this as: BMJ 2005;330:753

Related articles

See more

Cited by...

  • Engaging pregnant individuals and healthcare professionals in an international mixed methods study to develop a core outcome set for studies on placenta accreta spectrum disorder (COPAS): a study protocol
  • Association of gestational diabetes mellitus with overall and type specific cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases: systematic review and meta-analysis
  • Key Principles for Conducting a Good Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Acceptability of a task sharing and shifting model between family physicians and physiotherapists in French multidisciplinary primary healthcare centres: a cross-sectional survey
  • Assessing treatment effects and publication bias across different specialties in medicine: a meta-epidemiological study
  • Restoring invisible and abandoned trials of gabapentin for neuropathic pain: a clinical and methodological investigation
  • Evidence of unexplained discrepancies between planned and conducted statistical analyses: a review of randomized trials
  • Pre-registration in the undergraduate dissertation: A critical discussion
  • Peer reviewed evaluation of registered end-points of randomised trials (the PRE-REPORT study): protocol for a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised trial
  • Change in physical activity from adolescence to early adulthood: a systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal cohort studies
  • Physical activity interventions for major chronic disease: a matched-pair analysis of Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews
  • Guidance for reporting outcomes in clinical trials: scoping review protocol
  • Standards and Methodological Rigor in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Preclinical and Translational Research
  • Core outcome research measures in anal cancer (CORMAC): protocol for systematic review, qualitative interviews and Delphi survey to develop a core outcome set in anal cancer
  • Do Published Data in Trials Assessing Cancer Drugs Reflect the Real Picture of Efficacy and Safety?
  • Meta-analysis using individual participant data from randomised trials: opportunities and limitations created by access to raw data
  • Do patients with reduced or excellent performance status derive the same clinical benefit from novel systemic cancer therapies? A systematic review and meta-analysis
  • Are outcomes reported in surgical randomized trials patient-important? A systematic review and meta-analysis
  • Gabapentinoids for chronic low back pain: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
  • Management of non-syndromic dens evaginatus affecting permanent maxillary central incisors: a systematic review
  • Management of non-syndromic double tooth affecting permanent maxillary central incisors: a systematic review
  • How do authors of systematic reviews deal with research malpractice and misconduct in original studies? A cross-sectional analysis of systematic reviews and survey of their authors
  • Biological Risk Factors for Nonunion of Bone Fracture
  • Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation
  • A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of extreme weather events and other weather-related variables on Cryptosporidium and Giardia in fresh surface waters
  • Emergency Department Attendance by Patients With Cancer in Their Last Month of Life: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
  • "Hardly worth the effort"? Medical journals' policies and their editors' and publishers' views on trial registration and publication bias: quantitative and qualitative study
  • US studies may overestimate effect sizes in softer research
  • Prospective registration, bias risk and outcome-reporting bias in randomised clinical trials of traditional Chinese medicine: an empirical methodological study
  • Practices and impact of primary outcome adjustment in randomized controlled trials: meta-epidemiologic study
  • Out of sight but not out of mind: how to search for unpublished clinical trial evidence
  • Consistency in the Analysis and Reporting of Primary End Points in Oncology Randomized Controlled Trials From Registration to Publication: A Systematic Review
  • Multiplicity of data in trial reports and the reliability of meta-analyses: empirical study
  • A systematic review of randomised controlled trials of interventions promoting effective condom use
  • Frequency and reasons for outcome reporting bias in clinical trials: interviews with trialists
  • Small study effects in meta-analyses of osteoarthritis trials: meta-epidemiological study
  • Modified intention to treat reporting in randomised controlled trials: systematic review
  • The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews
  • The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration
  • Risk of bias versus quality assessment of randomised controlled trials: cross sectional study
  • Integration of evidence from multiple meta-analyses: a primer on umbrella reviews, treatment networks and multiple treatments meta-analyses
  • Reporting and interpretation of SF-36 outcomes in randomised trials: systematic review
  • Survival End Point Reporting in Randomized Cancer Clinical Trials: A Review of Major Journals
  • Research Reporting and Evidence of Effectiveness: Why "No Difference" Matters
  • Meta-Analysis
  • The appropriateness of asymmetry tests for publication bias in meta-analyses: a large survey
  • Clinical trial registration at Tobacco Control
  • Believability of relative risks and odds ratios in abstracts: cross sectional study
  • From the Library
  • Principles for international registration of protocol information and results from human trials of health related interventions: Ottawa statement (part 1)
Back to top