Dealing with the positive publication bias: Why you should really publish your negative results

被引:315
作者
Mlinaric, Ana [1 ]
Horvat, Martina [2 ]
Smolcic, Vesna Supak [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hosp Ctr Zagreb, Dept Lab Diagnost, Zagreb, Croatia
[2] Univ Hosp Split, Dept Med Lab Diagnost, Split, Croatia
[3] Clin Hosp Ctr Rijeka, Clin Inst Lab Diagnost, Rijeka, Croatia
[4] Rijeka Univ, Sch Med, Dept Med Informat, Rijeka, Croatia
关键词
negative results; publication bias; research integrity; medical journals; DISCONTINUATION; TRIALS;
D O I
10.11613/BM.2017.030201
中图分类号
R446 [实验室诊断]; R-33 [实验医学、医学实验];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
Studies with positive results are greatly more represented in literature than studies with negative results, producing so-called publication bias. This review aims to discuss occurring problems around negative results and to emphasize the importance of reporting negative results. Underreporting of negative results introduces bias into meta-analysis, which consequently misinforms researchers, doctors and policymakers. More resources are potentially wasted on already disputed research that remains unpublished and therefore unavailable to the scientific community. Ethical obligations need to be considered when reporting results of studies on human subjects as people have exposed themselves to risk with the assurance that the study is performed to benefit others. Some studies disprove the common conception that journal editors preferably publish positive findings, which are considered as more citable. Therefore, all stakeholders, but especially researchers, need to be conscious of disseminating negative and positive findings alike.
引用
收藏
页码:447 / 452
页数:6
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], CAS SUMM
[2]  
[Anonymous], COD COND BEST PRACT
[3]  
Baker M, 2016, NATURE, V533, P452, DOI 10.1038/533452a
[4]   Premature Discontinuation of Prospective Clinical Studies Approved by a Research Ethics Committee - A Comparison of Randomised and Non-Randomised Studies [J].
Blumle, Anette ;
Schandelmaier, Stefan ;
Oeller, Patrick ;
Kasenda, Benjamin ;
Briel, Matthias ;
von Elm, Erik .
PLOS ONE, 2016, 11 (10)
[5]   Discontinuation and non-publication of surgical randomised controlled trials: observational study [J].
Chapman, Stephen J. ;
Shelton, Bryony ;
Mahmood, Humza ;
Fitzgerald, J. Edward ;
Harrison, Ewen M. ;
Bhangu, Aneel .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2014, 349
[6]  
Chong SW, 2016, CAN J ANESTH, V63, P682, DOI 10.1007/s12630-016-0631-0
[7]   Publishing priorities of biomedical research funders [J].
Collins, Ellen .
BMJ OPEN, 2013, 3 (10)
[8]   Scientific citations favor positive results: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Duyx, Bram ;
Urlings, Miriam J. E. ;
Swaen, Gerard M. H. ;
Bouter, Lex M. ;
Zeegers, Maurice P. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2017, 88 :92-101
[9]   Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias [J].
Dwan, Kerry ;
Altman, Douglas G. ;
Arnaiz, Juan A. ;
Bloom, Jill ;
Chan, An-Wen ;
Cronin, Eugenia ;
Decullier, Evelyne ;
Easterbrook, Philippa J. ;
Von Elm, Erik ;
Gamble, Carrol ;
Ghersi, Davina ;
Ioannidis, John P. A. ;
Simes, John ;
Williamson, Paula R. .
PLOS ONE, 2008, 3 (08)
[10]  
Fanelli D., 2010, PLOS ONE, V5