Publication Trend of Clinical Trials with Negative Results Funded by Pharmaceutical Industries for the 2007-2012 Period

DOI:  https://doi.org/10.12804/revsalud13.01.2015.04

Article Sidebar

PDF (Español (España)) HTML (Español (España)) Lector Inteligente (Español (España)) ePub (Español (España))

Published: Feb 27, 2015
Issue: Vol. 13 No. 01 (2015)
Section Clinical or Experimental Research


Keywords: Clinical trial Bias Publication bias Outcome assessment Outcome.

Main Article Content

Authors

Evert A. Jiménez-Cotes
Laura Mejía-Cardona
Jorge H. Donado-Gómez

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the results of clinical trials financed by the pharmaceutical industries during the period 2007-2012 in a general medical journal. Materials and methods: We performed an observational cross sectional study where originals clinical trials financed by the pharmaceutical industry published between 2007 and 2012 in the journal The New England Journal of Medicine (http://www.nejm.org) were reviewed. Trend Chi2 test was used to evaluate the results of studies over the years. A database was created with different variables, identifying the number of publications and the period of greater publishing negatives studies, as well as the medical specialty and pharmaceutical industry funding. Results: 321 clinical trials were analyzed. The Odds Ratio was calculated for each year evaluated, finding a Chi2 of linear trend in negatives studies of 2.91 with value p 0.08 and positive studies of 1.16 with value p 0.28. It was found that in the period 2007-2009 123 studies were published, 40 % of which presented negative results; unlike the 2010-2012 period in which 198 clinical trials where published, 142 of them, showed positive results, OR 1.68, 95 % CI (1.02-2.78) value p 0.03. The highest figures of negative results were published in 2007: 44.7 %. Conclusions: A progressive decrease in the number of publications with annual general negative results has been observed. A statistically significant difference in the publication of negative studies per year was not found between the periods 2007-2012. The medical specialty that showed the largest number of total and negative publications in both periods was cardiology. The pharmaceutical industry that sponsored most total clinical trials with negative results in both periods did so through Merck, Glaxo SmithKline, and Sanofi-Aventis. 50 % of neurology publications showed negative results. 

How to Cite
Jiménez-Cotes, E. A., Mejía-Cardona, L., & Donado-Gómez, J. H. (2015). Publication Trend of Clinical Trials with Negative Results Funded by Pharmaceutical Industries for the 2007-2012 Period. Revista Ciencias De La Salud, 13(01), 55–62. https://doi.org/10.12804/revsalud13.01.2015.04
References

Abaid LN, Grimes DA, Schulz KF. Reducing publication bias of prospective clinical trials through trial registration. Contraception. 2007;76(5):339-41.

Siddiqi N. Publication bias in epidemiological studies. Cent Eur J Public Health. 2011;19(2):118-20.

Egger M, Zellweger-Zähner T, Schneider M, Junker C, Lengeler C, Antes G. Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German. Lancet. 1997;350(9074):326-9.

Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet. 1991;337(8746):867-72.

Stern JM, Simes RJ. Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects. BMJ. 1997;315(7109):640-5.

Jannot AS, Agoritsas T, Gayet-Ageron A, Perneger TV. Citation bias favoring statistically significant studies was present in medical research. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(3):296-301.

Callaham ML, Wears RL, Weber EJ, Barton C, Young G. Positive-outcome bias and other limitations in the outcome of research abstracts submitted to a scientific meeting. JAMA. 1998;280(3):254-7.

Dickersin K. How important is publication bias? A synthesis of available data. AIDS Educ Prev. 1997;9 (1 Suppl):15-21

Butler PA. Sesgo de publicación en estudios clínicos debido a la significancia estadística o la dirección de los resultados del estudio [internet] 2009. [citado 2014 oct 8]. Disponible en http://apps.who.int/ rhl/education/MR000006_butlerpa_com/es/

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 Syst Rev. 2009;(1):MR000006.

Begg CB, Berlin JA. Publication bias: a problem in interpreting medical data. J R Statist Soc A. 1988;151:419-63.

Freemantle N, Mason J. Publication bias in clinical trials and economic analyses. Pharmacoeconomics. 1997;12(1):10-6.

Richards SM, Burrett JA. A proposal for reducing the effect of one of many causes of publication bias. Trials. 2013;14:41.

World Medical Association. Declaración de Helsinki de la AMM - Principios éticos para las investigaciones médicas en seres humanos [internet]. 2013 [citado 2014 jul 1]. Disponible en: http://www.wma. net/es/30publications/10policies/b3/

ICMJE. Publishing and editorial issues related to publication in Biomedical Journals. Obligation to publish negative studies. En: Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to Biomedical Journals: writing and editing for Biomedical Publication [internet]. 2004 oct [citado 2014 jul. 1]. Disponible en: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/archives/2004_urm.pdf

Colombia, Ministerio de Salud. Resolución 8430 de 1993, Por la cual se establecen las normas científicas, técnicas y administrativas para la investigación en salud [internet]. 1993 [citado 2014 jun. 18] (1993 oct 4). Disponible en: http://www.unisabana.edu.co/fileadmin/Documentos/Investigacion/comite_de_etica/ Res__8430_1993_-_Salud.pdf

Montori VM, Smieja M, Guyatt GH. Publication bias: a brief review for clinicians. Mayo Clin Proc. 2000;75(12):1284-8.

Suñé P, Suñé JM, Montoro JB. Positive outcomes influence the rate and time to publication, but not the impact factor of publications of clinical trial results. PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e54583.

Schott G, Pachl H, Ludwig WD. The relation between publication bias and clinical trials funding. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2010;104(4):314-22.

Thornton A, Lee P. Publication bias in meta-analysis: its causes and consequences. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53(2):207-16.

Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA, Bloom J, Chan AW, Cronin E, et al. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS One. 2008;3(8):e3081.

Moreno SG, Sutton AJ, Ades AE, Cooper NJ, Abrams KR. Adjusting for publication biases across similar interventions performed well when compared with gold standard data. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(11):1230-41.

Hirsch JE. An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102(46):16569-72.

Loughlin S, Rodríguez GA. Análisis de la producción científica latinoamericana en medicina. Revista Argentina de Cardioangiología. 2013;4(3):164-9.

Query Statistics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Publcation metrics

1294 443




 

Published articles are solely the authors’ responsibility and do not commit the Editorial Committee nor the Scientific Committee. The copyrights belong to the Revista Ciencias de la Salud, therefore, total or partial reproduction of the published material is forbidden, unless there is a previous authorization.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.