Extent of non-publication in cohorts of studies approved by research ethics committees or included in trial registries

BACKGROUND: The synthesis of published research in systematic reviews is essential when providing evidence to inform clinical and health policy decision-making. However, the validity of systematic reviews is threatened if journal publications represent a biased selection of all studies that have been conducted (dissemination bias). To investigate the extent of dissemination bias we conducted a systematic review that determined the proportion of studies published as peer-reviewed journal articles and investigated factors associated with full publication in cohorts of studies (i) approved by research ethics committees (RECs) or (ii) included in trial registries. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Four bibliographic databases were searched for methodological research projects (MRPs) without limitations for publication year, language or study location. The searches were supplemented by handsearching the references of included MRPs. We estimated the proportion of studies published using prediction intervals (PI) and a random effects meta-analysis. Pooled odds ratios (OR) were used to express associations between study characteristics and journal publication. Seventeen MRPs (23 publications) evaluated cohorts of studies approved by RECs; the proportion of published studies had a PI between 22% and 72% and the weighted pooled proportion when combining estimates would be 46.2% (95% CI 40.2%-52.4%, I2 = 94.4%). Twenty-two MRPs (22 publications) evaluated cohorts of studies included in trial registries; the PI of the proportion published ranged from 13% to 90% and the weighted pooled proportion would be 54.2% (95% CI 42.0%-65.9%, I2 = 98.9%). REC-approved studies with statistically significant results (compared with those without statistically significant results) were more likely to be published (pooled OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.2-3.5). Phase-III trials were also more likely to be published than phase II trials (pooled OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.6-2.5). The probability of publication within two years after study completion ranged from 7% to 30%. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial part of the studies approved by RECs or included in trial registries remains unpublished. Due to the large heterogeneity a prediction of the publication probability for a future study is very uncertain. Non-publication of research is not a random process, e.g., it is associated with the direction of study findings. Our findings suggest that the dissemination of research findings is biased

Lower bound for the spatial extent of localized modes in photonic-crystal waveguides with small random imperfections

Light localization due to random imperfections in periodic media is paramount in photonics research. The group index is known to be a key parameter for localization near photonic band edges, since small group velocities reinforce light interaction with imperfections. Here, we show that the size of the smallest localized mode that is formed at the band edge of a one-dimensional periodic medium is driven instead by the effective photon mass, i.e. the flatness of the dispersion curve. Our theoretical prediction is supported by numerical simulations, which reveal that photonic-crystal waveguides can exhibit surprisingly small localized modes, much smaller than those observed in Bragg stacks thanks to their larger effective photon mass. This possibility is demonstrated experimentally with a photonic-crystal waveguide fabricated without any intentional disorder, for which near-field measurements allow us to distinctly observe a wavelength-scale localized mode despite the smallness (∼1/1000 of a wavelength) of the fabrication imperfections

Exchange-induced frustration in Fe/NiO multilayers

Using spin-polarized low-energy electron microscopy to study magnetization in epitaxial layered systems, we found that the area vs perimeter relationship of magnetic domains in the top Fe layers of Fe/NiO/Fe(100) structures follows a power-law distribution, with very small magnetic domain cutoff radius (about 40 nm) and domain wall thickness. This unusual magnetic microstructure can be understood as resulting from the competition between antiferromagnetic and ferromagnetic exchange interactions at the Fe/NiO interfaces, rather than from mechanisms involving the anisotropy and dipolar forces that govern length scales in conventional magnetic domain structures. Statistical analysis of our measurements validates a micromagnetic model that accounts for this interfacial exchange coupling.Comment: 15 pages, 2 figure

Extent of non-publication in cohorts of studies approved by research ethics committees or included in trial registries

Background: The synthesis of published research in systematic reviews is essential when providing evidence to inform clinical and health policy decisionmaking. However, the validity of systematic reviews is threatened if journal publications represent a biased selection of all studies that have been conducted (dissemination bias). To investigate the extent of dissemination bias we conducted a systematic review that determined the proportion of studies published as peerreviewed journal articles and investigated factors associated with full publication in cohorts of studies (i) approved by research ethics committees (RECs) or (ii) included in trial registries. Copyright:Methods and Findings: Four bibliographic databases were searched for methodological research projects (MRPs) without limitations for publication year, language or study location. The searches were supplemented by handsearching the references of included MRPs. We estimated the proportion of studies published using prediction intervals (PI) and a random effects meta-analysis. Pooled odds ratios (OR) were used to express associations between study characteristics and journal publication. Seventeen MRPs (23 publications) evaluated cohorts of studies approved by RECs; the proportion of published studies had a PI between 22% and 72% and the weighted pooled proportion when combining estimates would be 46.2% (95% CI 40.2%-52.4%, I2594.4%). Twenty-two MRPs (22 publications) evaluated cohorts of studies included in trial registries; the PI of the proportion published ranged from 13% to 90% and the weighted pooled proportion would be 54.2% (95% CI 42.0%-65.9%, I2598.9%). REC-approved studies with statistically significant results (compared with those without statistically significant results) were more likely to be published (pooled OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.2-3.5). Phase-III trials were also more likely to be published than phase II trials (pooled OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.6- 2.5). The probability of publication within two years after study completion ranged from 7% to 30%.Conclusions: A substantial part of the studies approved by RECs or included in trial registries remains unpublished. Due to the large heterogeneity a prediction of the publication probability for a future study is very uncertain. Non-publication of research is not a random process, e.g., it is associated with the direction of study findings. Our findings suggest that the dissemination of research findings is biased

Viscum album L. extracts in breast and gynaecological cancers: a systematic review of clinical and preclinical research

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p><it>Viscum album </it>L. extracts (VAE, European mistletoe) are a widely used medicinal plant extract in gynaecological and breast-cancer treatment.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Systematic review to evaluate clinical studies and preclinical research on the therapeutic effectiveness and biological effects of VAE on gynaecological and breast cancer. Search of databases, reference lists and expert consultations. Criteria-based assessment of methodological study quality.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>19 randomized (RCT), 16 non-randomized (non-RCT) controlled studies, and 11 single-arm cohort studies were identified that investigated VAE treatment of breast or gynaecological cancer. They included 2420, 6399 and 1130 patients respectively. 8 RCTs and 8 non-RCTs were embedded in the same large epidemiological cohort study. 9 RCTs and 13 non-RCTs assessed survival; 12 reported a statistically significant benefit, the others either a trend or no difference. 3 RCTs and 6 non-RCTs assessed tumour behaviour (remission or time to relapse); 3 reported statistically significant benefit, the others either a trend, no difference or mixed results. Quality of life (QoL) and tolerability of chemotherapy, radiotherapy or surgery was assessed in 15 RCTs and 9 non-RCTs. 21 reported a statistically significant positive result, the others either a trend, no difference, or mixed results. Methodological quality of the studies differed substantially; some had major limitations, especially RCTs on survival and tumour behaviour had very small sample sizes. Some recent studies, however, especially on QoL were reasonably well conducted. Single-arm cohort studies investigated tumour behaviour, QoL, pharmacokinetics and safety of VAE. Tumour remission was observed after high dosage and local application. VAE application was well tolerated. 34 animal experiments investigated VAE and isolated or recombinant compounds in various breast and gynaecological cancer models in mice and rats. VAE showed increase of survival and tumour remission especially in mice, while application in rats as well as application of VAE compounds had mixed results. <it>In vitro </it>VAE and its compounds have strong cytotoxic effects on cancer cells.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>VAE shows some positive effects in breast and gynaecological cancer. More research into clinical efficacy is warranted.</p

A protocol for a systematic review on the impact of unpublished studies and studies published in the gray literature in meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses are particularly vulnerable to the effects of publication bias. Despite methodologists' best efforts to locate all evidence for a given topic the most comprehensive searches are likely to miss unpublished studies and studies that are published in the gray literature only. If the results of the missing studies differ systematically from the published ones, a meta-analysis will be biased with an inaccurate assessment of the intervention's effects.As part of the OPEN project (http://www.open-project.eu) we will conduct a systematic review with the following objectives:â-ª To assess the impact of studies that are not published or published in the gray literature on pooled effect estimates in meta-analyses (quantitative measure).â-ª To assess whether the inclusion of unpublished studies or studies published in the gray literature leads to different conclusions in meta-analyses (qualitative measure). METHODS/DESIGN: Inclusion criteria: Methodological research projects of a cohort of meta-analyses which compare the effect of the inclusion or exclusion of unpublished studies or studies published in the gray literature.Literature search: To identify relevant research projects we will conduct electronic searches in Medline, Embase and The Cochrane Library; check reference lists; and contact experts.Outcomes: 1) The extent to which the effect estimate in a meta-analyses changes with the inclusion or exclusion of studies that were not published or published in the gray literature; and 2) the extent to which the inclusion of unpublished studies impacts the meta-analyses' conclusions.Data collection: Information will be collected on the area of health care; the number of meta-analyses included in the methodological research project; the number of studies included in the meta-analyses; the number of study participants; the number and type of unpublished studies; studies published in the gray literature and published studies; the sources used to retrieve studies that are unpublished, published in the gray literature, or commercially published; and the validity of the methodological research project.Data synthesis: Data synthesis will involve descriptive and statistical summaries of the findings of the included methodological research projects. DISCUSSION: Results are expected to be publicly available in the middle of 2013

A Systemic Approach to Health and Disease: The Interaction of Individuals, Medicines, Cultures and Environments

Systemic approaches seek to comprehend a given phenomenon as the result of the dynamic and non-linear interaction between different levels of a system, without reducing one to the other. The relationship between the different components thus remains central, rather than the specific components themselves. Therefore, systemic approaches to treatment and disease don’t presume to reduce either to exclusively physicochemical factors. In this chapter we will begin by discussing some key elements of systemic approaches and then make a critical evaluation on the basic assumptions of the hitherto dominant approach in the medical sciences. We will then show how it is possible to consider health and disease as systemic processes by analyzing several cases situated at different levels of complexity. Finally, we will attempt to identify some trends in the current organization of care services that seem to be going in, what appears to us, a hopeful direction

The adaptation for Italy of the questionnaire on autonomic regulation: an innovative tool for conventional and CAM health professionals and patients&apos; self-awareness : preliminary results of a patients&apos; self-administered version

Questionnaires on autonomic regulation (aR-Q) were developed by anthroposophic medicine (AM) at FIH, Berlin. In particular, an 18 item trait scale has been studied both in healthy people and ill patients, to evaluate the constitutional background and to introduce in medicine a salutogenetic-based practical measure. AR-Q focuses on the regulation and rhythms of autonomic functions to access individual complexity, according to AM, which depicts human beings as integrated systems of physical, living, psychic and spiritual levels. The study aims to define the process of translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the aR-Q into Italian in order to obtain a patients' self-administered version. The Italian version for health professionals will follow