Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Publishing clinical trials and dealing with external comparisons

J J Shuster

    Controlled Clinical Trials
    |June 10, 1998
    PubMed
    Summary

    This note helps research teams rebut referee criticism of clinical trial results. It explains how comparing trials can lead to publication bias and overestimation of treatment benefits.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Infectious diseases in dogs rescued during dogfighting investigations.

    Veterinary journal (London, England : 1997)·2016
    Same author

    Packed red blood cell transfusion is not associated with increased risk of necrotizing enterocolitis in premature infants.

    Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association·2014
    Same author

    Phase 1 trial of dichloroacetate (DCA) in adults with recurrent malignant brain tumors.

    Investigational new drugs·2013
    Same author

    Design and statistical analysis of oral medicine studies: common pitfalls.

    Oral diseases·2009
    Same author

    Hyperlipidemia in glycogen storage disease type III: effect of age and metabolic control.

    Journal of inherited metabolic disease·2008
    Same author

    High concordance from independent studies by the Children's Cancer Group (CCG) and Pediatric Oncology Group (POG) associating favorable prognosis with combined trisomies 4, 10, and 17 in children with NCI Standard-Risk B-precursor Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: a Children's Oncology Group (COG) initiative.

    Leukemia·2005

    Area of Science:

    • Medical Research
    • Clinical Trials
    • Publication Ethics

    Background:

    • Peer-reviewers often reject clinical trials showing less benefit than others.
    • This rejection is based on the perception of no public health benefit.
    • Such practices contribute to publication bias in medical literature.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To provide a reference for research teams publishing clinical trials.
    • To offer guidance on rebutting referee criticism regarding trial results.
    • To address the issue of perceived inferiority of trial outcomes.

    Main Methods:

    • This is a conceptual note, not an empirical study.
    • It outlines arguments against referee bias in clinical trial publication.
    • It focuses on the logical fallacy of comparing disparate trial results.

    Main Results:

    • Publication bias systematically overestimates therapeutic benefits.
    • Rejecting trials with less benefit harms scientific accuracy.
    • A framework for rebutting biased referee comments is proposed.

    Conclusions:

    • Comparing clinical trial results inappropriately leads to publication bias.
    • Ensuring publication of all trial results is crucial for accurate medical literature.
    • Researchers can use this note to defend their findings against biased reviews.

    Related Experiment Videos