Evidence b(i)ased medicine--selective reporting from studies sponsored by pharmaceutical industry: review of studies in new drug applications.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the relative impact on publication bias caused by multiple publication, selective publication, and selective reporting in studies sponsored by pharmaceutical companies.


METHODS
42 placebo controlled studies of five selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors submitted to the Swedish drug regulatory authority as a basis for marketing approval for treating major depression were compared with the studies actually published (between 1983 and 1999).


RESULTS
Multiple publication: 21 studies contributed to at least two publications each, and three studies contributed to five publications. Selective publication: studies showing significant effects of drug were published as stand alone publications more often than studies with non-significant results. Selective reporting: many publications ignored the results of intention to treat analyses and reported the more favourable per protocol analyses only.


CONCLUSIONS
The degree of multiple publication, selective publication, and selective reporting differed between products. Thus, any attempt to recommend a specific selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor from the publicly available data only is likely to be based on biased evidence.
Melander
Hans
H
Medical Products Agency, Box 23, S-751 03 Uppsala, Sweden. hans.melander@mpa.se
Ahlqvist-Rastad
Jane
J
Meijer
Gertie
G
Beermann
Björn
B
D003866:Depressive Disorder / Q000188:drug therapy; D004341:Drug Evaluation; D004345:Drug Industry / Q000191:economics*; D006801:Humans; D017594:Publication Bias; D011643:Publishing / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic / Q000592:standards; D012106:Research / Q000592:standards; D012109:Research Support as Topic; D017367:Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors / Q000627:therapeutic use*
D017367:Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors