Are studies reporting significant results more likely to be published?

Koletsi, Despina; Karagianni, Anthi; Pandis, Nikolaos; Makou, Margarita; Polychronopoulou, Argy; Eliades, Theodore

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.02.024

Cited by 60 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For articles accepted to the AJO-DO, the global test showed a difference among the three categories of (1) [Koletsi et al 2009]. Yet this publication bias did not bear out when analyzing publication rates among the rejected articles.…”

Section: Statistical Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

Characteristics and fate of orthodontic articles submitted for publication: An exploratory study of the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

Farjo

Turpin

Coley

et al. 2015

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Statistical Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

Characteristics and fate of orthodontic articles submitted for publication: An exploratory study of the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

Farjo

Turpin

Coley

et al. 2015

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The majority of articles in the biomedical literature, including orthodontics, tend to report a significant or beneficial treatment effect, whereas negative, null or non-significant findings are less likely to be published (von Elm et al, 2003, Koletsi et al, 2009). This phenomenon has become known as publication bias and has several implications associated with potentially distorted evidence as only a biased subsample towards positive effects is readily available for research synthesis (Egger et al, 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Full-text publication of abstracts presented at European Orthodontic Society congresses

Livas¹,

Pandis²,

Ren³

2013

The European Journal of Orthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMaRYINTRODUCTION: Empirical evidence has indicated that only a subsample of studies conducted reach fulltext publication and this phenomenon has become known as publication bias. a form of publication bias is the selectively delayed full publication of conference abstracts. The objective of this article was to examine the publication status of oral abstracts and poster-presentation abstracts, included in the scientific program of the 82nd and 83rd European Orthodontic Society (EOS) congresses, held in 2006 and 2007, and to identify factors associated with full-length publication.METHODS: a systematic search of PubMed and Google Scholar databases was performed in april 2013 using author names and keywords from the abstract title to locate abstract and full-article publications. Information regarding mode of presentation, type of affiliation, geographical origin, statistical results, and publication details were collected and analyzed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression.RESULTS: approximately 51 per cent of the EOS 2006 and 55 per cent of the EOS 2007 abstracts appeared in print more than 5 years post congress. a mean period of 1.32 years elapsed between conference and publication date. Mode of presentation (oral or poster), use of statistical analysis, and research subject area were significant predictors for publication success.LIMITaTIONS: Inherent discrepancies of abstract reporting, mainly related to presentation of preliminary results and incomplete description of methods, may be considered in analogous studies.CONCLUSIONS: On average 52.2 per cent of the abstracts presented at the two EOS conferences reached full publication. abstracts presented orally, including statistical analysis, were more likely to get published.

show abstract

“…9 A review of five orthodontic journals shows that 88% of studies demonstrated statistically significant results. 10 A similar study of journals in maxillofacial surgery came up with a figure of 77%. 11 Like other health care domains, publication bias is clearly a problem in dental research.…”

mentioning

confidence: 90%

“…[9][10][11][12] Dental health researchers might quite understandably think of the funnel plot and associated statistical tests as tools to detect only publication bias. A funnel plot can be asymmetric for a number of reasons and statistical tests to assess reporting bias have their limitations.…”

Section: Implications For Dental Health Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The role of the funnel plot in detecting publication and related biases in meta-analysis

Liu

2011

Evid Based Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are studies reporting significant results more likely to be published?

Cited by 60 publications

References 28 publications

Characteristics and fate of orthodontic articles submitted for publication: An exploratory study of the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

Characteristics and fate of orthodontic articles submitted for publication: An exploratory study of the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

Full-text publication of abstracts presented at European Orthodontic Society congresses

The role of the funnel plot in detecting publication and related biases in meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About