Skip to main content
×
×
Home

The cumulative effect of reporting and citation biases on the apparent efficacy of treatments: the case of depression

  • Y. A. de Vries (a1) (a2), A. M. Roest (a1) (a2), P. de Jonge (a1) (a2), P. Cuijpers (a3), M. R. Munafò (a4) (a5) and J. A. Bastiaansen (a1) (a6)...
  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      The cumulative effect of reporting and citation biases on the apparent efficacy of treatments: the case of depression
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      The cumulative effect of reporting and citation biases on the apparent efficacy of treatments: the case of depression
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      The cumulative effect of reporting and citation biases on the apparent efficacy of treatments: the case of depression
      Available formats
      ×
Abstract
Copyright
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Corresponding author
Author for correspondence: Y. A. de Vries, E-mail: y.a.de.vries@rug.nl
References
Hide All
Boutron, I, Altman, DG, Hopewell, S, Vera-Badillo, F, Tannock, I and Ravaud, P (2014) Impact of spin in the abstracts of articles reporting results of randomized controlled trials in the field of cancer: the SPIIN randomized controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology 32, 41204126.
Boutron, I, Dutton, S, Ravaud, P and Altman, DG (2010) Reporting and interpretation of randomized controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant results for primary outcomes. JAMA 303, 20582064.
de Vries, YA, Roest, AM, Franzen, M, Munafò, MR and Bastiaansen, JA (2016) Citation bias and selective focus on positive findings in the literature on the serotonin transporter gene (5-HTTLPR), life stress and depression. Psychological Medicine 46, 29712979.
Driessen, E, Hollon, SD, Bockting, CLH, Cuijpers, P and Turner, EH (2015) Does publication bias inflate the apparent efficacy of psychological treatment for major depressive disorder? A systematic review and meta-analysis of US National Institutes of Health-funded trials. PLoS One 10, e0137864.
Duyx, B, Urlings, MJE, Swaen, GMH, Bouter, LM and Zeegers, MP (2017) Scientific citations favor positive results: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 88, 92101.
Dwan, K, Gamble, C, Williamson, PR and Kirkham, JJ (2013) Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias – an updated review. PLoS One 8, e66844.
Flint, J, Cuijpers, P, Horder, J, Koole, SL and Munafò, MR (2015) Is there an excess of significant findings in published studies of psychotherapy for depression? Psychological Medicine 45, 439446.
Harriman, SL and Patel, J (2016) When are clinical trials registered? An analysis of prospective versus retrospective registration. Trials 17, 187.
Jones, CW, Keil, LG, Holland, WC, Caughey, MC and Platts-Mills, TF (2015) Comparison of registered and published outcomes in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review. BMC Medicine 13, 282.
Kicinski, M (2014) How does under-reporting of negative and inconclusive results affect the false-positive rate in meta-analysis? A simulation study. BMJ Open 4, e004831.
Knüppel, H, Metz, C, Meerpohl, JJ and Strech, D (2013) How psychiatry journals support the unbiased translation of clinical research. A cross-sectional study of editorial policies. PLoS One 8, e75995.
Rickels, K, Amsterdam, JD and Avallone, MF (1986) Fluoxetine in major depression: a controlled study. Curr. Ther. Res. 39, 1986.
Ross, JS, Mulvey, GK, Hines, EM, Nissen, SE and Krumholz, HM (2009) Trial publication after registration in ClinicalTrials.gov: a cross-sectional analysis. PLoS Medicine 6, e1000144.
Turner, EH, Matthews, AM, Linardatos, E, Tell, RA and Rosenthal, R (2008) Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy. New England Journal of Medicine 358, 252260.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Psychological Medicine
  • ISSN: 0033-2917
  • EISSN: 1469-8978
  • URL: /core/journals/psychological-medicine
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary materials

de Vries et al. supplementary material
de Vries et al. supplementary material 1

 Word (28 KB)
28 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 1225
Total number of PDF views: 2188 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 8305 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 2nd August 2018 - 22nd September 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.