Related Experiment Videos
Impact of covert duplicate publication on meta-analysis: a case study
M R Tramèr1, D J Reynolds, R A Moore
1Nuffield Department of Anaesthetics, Churchill Hospital, Oxford. martin.tramer%mailgate.jr2@ox.ac.uk
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.)
|October 6, 1997
Summary
Duplicate data in medical research significantly skews results. This study found that duplicated trials and patient data led to an overestimation of ondansetron
Area of Science:
- Pharmacology
- Clinical Trials
- Biostatistics
Background:
- Duplicate publication of clinical trial data is a concern in medical research.
- Ondansetron is an antiemetic used for postoperative emesis.
Purpose of the Study:
- To quantify the impact of duplicate data on the estimated efficacy of ondansetron for postoperative emesis.
- To compare the antiemetic efficacy derived from non-duplicated versus duplicated data.
Main Methods:
- Systematic search for published full reports of randomized controlled trials on ondansetron for postoperative emesis.
- Analysis of duplicated trials and patient data, estimating antiemetic efficacy.
- Comparison of efficacy estimates between non-duplicated and duplicated datasets.
Main Results:
- 17% of published trial reports and 28% of patient data were found to be duplicated.
- Trials with greater reported treatment effects were more likely to be duplicated.
- Duplicate data led to a 23% overestimation of ondansetron's antiemetic efficacy.
Conclusions:
- Duplicate data significantly inflates the perceived efficacy of treatments.
- Systematic searches are crucial to identify and mitigate the impact of data duplication.
- Accurate meta-analyses require careful exclusion of duplicated information.