Selective Publication of Antidepressant Trials and Its Influence on Apparent Efficacy

Turner. (2008). Selective Publication of Antidepressant Trials and Its Influence on Apparent Efficacy. New England Journal of Medicine.

Type

Journal article

Intellectual base

Primary research

Year

2008

DOI

10.1056/nejmsa065779

Link

https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmsa065779

Cited by

2 citations across 2 artifacts.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Domain-specific

• Cherry Picking
  • Turner and colleagues (2008, New England Journal of Medicine) showed that among FDA-registered antidepressant trials, studies with positive results were far more likely to be published than those with negative or questionable results, inflating the drugs' apparent efficacy in the literature: the published record made 94% of trials appear positive where the FDA's own analysis found only 51%, a gap wider than the publication decision alone can account for.

    This sourceTurner and colleagues' comparison of 74 FDA-registered antidepressant trials against the published record: 31% went unpublished, the literature made 94% of trials appear positive where the FDA found 51%, and trials the FDA judged negative or questionable were often written up to convey a positive outcome - which is why the gap outruns the publication decision.

• Publication Bias
  • Journal and conference publication: significant, positive, or novel findings receive preferential acceptance or submission. Clinical research: trials or outcomes unfavorable to an intervention remain unpublished or incompletely reported

Verification

This reference passed the adversarial substantiation pipeline: it was checked to exist and to support the claim it is attached to. See how references were verified.

Registry ID ref:5f2af663b1c0 · see in the full table