161 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21889307)
1. Retrospective cohort study highlighted outcome reporting bias in UK publicly funded trials.
Matthews GA; Dumville JC; Hewitt CE; Torgerson DJ
J Clin Epidemiol; 2011 Dec; 64(12):1317-24. PubMed ID: 21889307
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Outcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
Chan AW; Krleza-Jerić K; Schmid I; Altman DG
CMAJ; 2004 Sep; 171(7):735-40. PubMed ID: 15451835
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Clinical trial metadata: defining and extracting metadata on the design, conduct, results and costs of 125 randomised clinical trials funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Raftery J; Young A; Stanton L; Milne R; Cook A; Turner D; Davidson P
Health Technol Assess; 2015 Feb; 19(11):1-138. PubMed ID: 25671821
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Changes to registration elements and results in a cohort of Clinicaltrials.gov trials were not reflected in published articles.
Pranić S; Marušić A
J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Feb; 70():26-37. PubMed ID: 26226103
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Bibliometrics of NIHR HTA monographs and their related journal articles.
Royle P; Waugh N
BMJ Open; 2015 Feb; 5(2):e006595. PubMed ID: 25694457
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The clinical relevance and newsworthiness of NIHR HTA-funded research: a cohort study.
Wright D; Young A; Iserman E; Maeso R; Turner S; Haynes RB; Milne R
BMJ Open; 2014 May; 4(5):e004556. PubMed ID: 24812191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Publication times, impact factors, and advance online publication in ophthalmology journals.
Chen H; Chen CH; Jhanji V
Ophthalmology; 2013 Aug; 120(8):1697-701. PubMed ID: 23623355
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Publication and non-publication of drug trial results: a 10-year cohort of trials in Norwegian general practice.
Brænd AM; Straand J; Jakobsen RB; Klovning A
BMJ Open; 2016 Apr; 6(4):e010535. PubMed ID: 27067893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Publication bias in the anesthesiology literature.
De Oliveira GS; Chang R; Kendall MC; Fitzgerald PC; McCarthy RJ
Anesth Analg; 2012 May; 114(5):1042-8. PubMed ID: 22344237
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles.
Chan AW; Hróbjartsson A; Haahr MT; Gøtzsche PC; Altman DG
JAMA; 2004 May; 291(20):2457-65. PubMed ID: 15161896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The completeness of intervention descriptions in published National Institute of Health Research HTA-funded trials: a cross-sectional study.
Douet L; Milne R; Anstee S; Habens F; Young A; Wright D
BMJ Open; 2014 Jan; 4(1):e003713. PubMed ID: 24384896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison between publicly accessible publications, registries, and protocols of phase III trials indicated persistence of selective outcome reporting.
Zhang S; Liang F; Li W
J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Nov; 91():87-94. PubMed ID: 28757260
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Outcome reporting among drug trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov.
Bourgeois FT; Murthy S; Mandl KD
Ann Intern Med; 2010 Aug; 153(3):158-66. PubMed ID: 20679560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Publication Speed, Reporting Metrics, and Citation Impact of Cardiovascular Trials Supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.
Gordon D; Cooper-Arnold K; Lauer M
J Am Heart Assoc; 2015 Jul; 4(8):e002292. PubMed ID: 26231845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Publication bias for CAM trials in the highest impact factor medicine journals is partly due to geographical bias.
Sood A; Knudsen K; Sood R; Wahner-Roedler DL; Barnes SA; Bardia A; Bauer BA
J Clin Epidemiol; 2007 Nov; 60(11):1123-6. PubMed ID: 17938053
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Positive Results Bias and Impact Factor in Ophthalmology.
Mimouni M; Krauthammer M; Gershoni A; Mimouni F; Nesher R
Curr Eye Res; 2015; 40(8):858-61. PubMed ID: 25198281
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Bad science, sloppy reporting, and retracted publications: should peer review be the scapegoat?
Thomas SP
Issues Ment Health Nurs; 2014 Jun; 35(6):411-2. PubMed ID: 24857524
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Research on peer review and biomedical publication: furthering the quest to improve the quality of reporting.
Rennie D; Flanagin A
JAMA; 2014 Mar; 311(10):1019-20. PubMed ID: 24618962
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Randomized trials published in the journal of dental research are cited more often compared with those in other top-tier non-specialty-specific dental journals.
Allareddy V; Shah A; Lin CY; Elangovan S; Lee MK; Chung K; Vasudavan S; Karimbux NY
J Evid Based Dent Pract; 2010 Jun; 10(2):71-7. PubMed ID: 20466313
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Time to publication for NIHR HTA programme-funded research: a cohort study.
Chinnery F; Young A; Goodman J; Ashton-Key M; Milne R
BMJ Open; 2013 Nov; 3(11):e004121. PubMed ID: 24285634
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
