USF-LVHN SELECT
Publication Bias in Clinical Trials in Cataract Therapies: Implications for Evidence-Based Decision-Making: Publication Bias in Clinical Trials in Cataract Therapies.
Publication/Presentation Date
7-3-2024
Abstract
Evidence-based decision-making is generally based on published evidence. Therefore, if the published evidence is biased, so will the decision-making. One possible bias is the "positive-results" publication bias. This study attempts to characterize this phenomenon in cataract therapy trials. Studies were categorized as "positive" if their results were congruent with the hypothesis and "negative" if not. Secondary outcomes included the influence of funding source and differences in publication metrics between "positive" and "negative" publications. The US NLM Clinical Trials database was reviewed for cataract trials, yielding 248 trials. Trials with less than 2 treatment arms, less than 5 participants, or insufficient reporting were excluded. Data was collected on intervention, treatment arms, funding type, publication rates, citation rate, and the impact factor/H-index of journals. Of the 132 trials included, there were 69 positive and 63 negative results. Publication rate for positive results (71%) was significantly greater than negative results (17%), (p
ISSN
1873-4502
Published In/Presented At
Paturu, T., Shukla, A., Shivan, S. G., Benyahia, S. A., Lippert, T., & Velanovich, V. (2024). Publication Bias in Clinical Trials in Cataract Therapies: Implications for Evidence-Based Decision-Making: Publication Bias in Clinical Trials in Cataract Therapies. Journal of cataract and refractive surgery, 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001516. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001516
Disciplines
Medical Education | Medicine and Health Sciences
PubMedID
38958957
Department(s)
USF-LVHN SELECT Program, USF-LVHN SELECT Program Students
Document Type
Article