Cargando…
Clinical trials registries are under-utilized in the conduct of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional analysis
BACKGROUND: Publication bias is a major threat to the validity of systematic reviews. Searches of clinical trials registries can help to identify unpublished trials, though little is known about how often these resources are utilized. We assessed the usage and results of registry searches reported i...
Autores principales: | Jones, Christopher W, Keil, Lukas G, Weaver, Mark A, Platts-Mills, Timothy F |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4217330/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25348628 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-3-126 |
Ejemplares similares
-
Non-publication of large randomized clinical trials: cross sectional analysis
por: Jones, Christopher W, et al.
Publicado: (2013) -
Comparison of registered and published outcomes in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review
por: Jones, Christopher W., et al.
Publicado: (2015) -
Characteristics of COVID-19 clinical trials registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: cross-sectional analysis
por: Jones, Christopher W, et al.
Publicado: (2020) -
Citation bias favoring positive clinical trials of thrombolytics for acute ischemic stroke: a cross-sectional analysis
por: Misemer, Benjamin S., et al.
Publicado: (2016) -
Discrepancies between ClinicalTrials.gov recruitment status and actual trial status: a cross-sectional analysis
por: Jones, Christopher W, et al.
Publicado: (2017)