Author:
Marshall Max,Lockwood Austin,Bradley Caroline,Adams Clive,Joy Claire,Fenton Mark
Abstract
BackgroundA recent review suggested an association between using unpublished scales in clinical trials and finding significant results.AimsTo determine whether such an association existed in schizophrenia trials.MethodThree hundred trials were randomly selected from the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register. All comparisons between treatment groups and control groups using rating scales were identified. The publication status of each scale was determined and claims of a significant treatment effect were recorded.ResultsTrials were more likely to report that a treatment was superior to control when an unpublished scale was used to make the comparison (relative risk 1.37 (95% C11.12–1.68)). This effect increased when a ‘gold-standard’ definition of treatment superiority was applied (RR 1.94 (95% C11.35–2.79)). In non-pharmacological trials, one-third of ‘gold-standard’ claims of treatment superiority would not have been made if published scales had been used.ConclusionsUnpublished scales are a source of bias in schizophrenia trials.
Publisher
Royal College of Psychiatrists
Subject
Psychiatry and Mental health
Cited by
778 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献