Publication bias in the medical literature: a review by a Canadian Research Ethics Board.
BACKGROUND
We reviewed the publication record of all protocols submitted to the Capital District Health Authority Research Ethics Board (REB) in Halifax, Nova Scotia, for the period 1995-1996. Because of a heightened awareness of the issue, we hypothesized that there would be less publication bias (a failure to report negative results) and a higher publication rate from completed studies, than previously reported.


METHODS
Closed studies were identified from the REB database. Publications were identified by the investigators, requests from sponsors, and a literature review. For each publication, we identified authors, title, journal, number of subjects enrolled, and whether or not the publication was a report of a randomized clinical trial. Comparisons were done using a Student's t test, the Chi-square statistic, or Fisher's exact test as appropriate.


RESULTS
From the database of closed studies, 106 remained unpublished, while completed investigations resulted in 84 publications (44% publication rate). The median time to publication was 32.5 months. Publication of statistically significant results occurred in 71/84 trials. Publication of protocols submitted by departments ranged from 91% (anesthesia; 10/11) to 25% [nursing; 2/8 (P<0.05)]. Trials investigating new drugs in Phase 3 or 4 studies were more likely to be published than trials investigating agents in Phase 1 or 2 (P<0.05), and were less likely to be published if sponsored by a pharmaceutical company (P<0.05).


CONCLUSIONS
Publication bias continues to be a problem, particularly for early phase investigative studies. Our results suggest that a different approach is required to reduce publication bias. The role that REBs and peer-reviewed journals might play requires further exploration.
Hall
Richard
R
Dalhousie University and the Capital District Health Authority, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. rihall@dal.ca
de Antueno
Cecilia
C
Webber
Adam
A
D000328:Adult; D002170:Canada; D002985:Clinical Protocols / Q000592:standards; D028744:Ethics Committees, Research; D006801:Humans; D010506:Periodicals as Topic / Q000592:standards; D017594:Publication Bias / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D012106:Research / Q000458:organization & administration*; D012108:Research Personnel / Q000941:ethics*; D015871:Scientific Misconduct; D013997:Time Factors