Selective Publication of Antidepressant Trials and Its Influence on Apparent Efficacy¶
Turner, E. H., Matthews, A. M., Linardatos, E., Tell, R. A., & Rosenthal, R. (2008). Selective Publication of Antidepressant Trials and Its Influence on Apparent Efficacy. New England Journal of Medicine.
Cited by¶
3 citations across 3 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and colleagues' comparison of 74 FDA-registered antidepressant trials against the published record: 31% went unpublished, the literature made 94% of trials appear positive where the FDA found 51%, and trials the FDA judged negative or questionable were often written up to convey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.
SupportedVerified against the source
- 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.
- File Drawer Problem
- Turner and colleagues' 2008 study in the New England Journal of Medicine is the definitive demonstration
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
“We obtained reviews from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for studies of 12 antidepressant agents involving 12,564 patients.”
- Turner and colleagues' 2008 study in the New England Journal of Medicine is the definitive demonstration
- Publication Bias
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 3 of 3 citations: 2 supported, 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:5f2af663b1c0 · see in the full table