Cargando…
Reporting of harms outcomes: a comparison of journal publications with unpublished clinical study reports of orlistat trials
BACKGROUND: The quality of harms reporting in journal publications is often poor, which can impede the risk-benefit interpretation of a clinical trial. Clinical study reports can provide more reliable, complete, and informative data on harms compared to the corresponding journal publication. This ca...
Autores principales: | Hodkinson, Alex, Gamble, Carrol, Smith, Catrin Tudur |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4840982/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27103582 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1327-z |
Ejemplares similares
-
Reporting of harms data in RCTs: a systematic review of empirical assessments against the CONSORT harms extension
por: Hodkinson, Alex, et al.
Publicado: (2013) -
Indirect Comparisons: A Review of Reporting and Methodological Quality
por: Donegan, Sarah, et al.
Publicado: (2010) -
Completeness of Reporting of Patient-Relevant Clinical Trial Outcomes: Comparison of Unpublished Clinical Study Reports with Publicly Available Data
por: Wieseler, Beate, et al.
Publicado: (2013) -
Risk-proportionate clinical trial monitoring: an example approach from a non-commercial trials unit
por: Tudur Smith, Catrin, et al.
Publicado: (2014) -
Information work with unpublished reports
por: Holloway, A H, et al.
Publicado: (1976)