The publication process itself was the major cause of publication bias in genetic epidemiology

被引:30
作者
Calnan, Michael [1 ]
Smith, George Davey
Sterne, Jonathan A. C.
机构
[1] MRC, Hlth Serv Res Collaborat, Bristol, Avon, England
[2] Univ Bristol, Dept Social Med, Bristol BS8 2PR, Avon, England
关键词
publication bias; professional beliefs; genetic epidemiology; qualitative methods; genetic scientists; negative findings;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.05.002
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives: How do scientists in the field of genetic epidemiology see the problem of publication bias, what are the possible solutions and what particular pressures are they under that might either promote or prevent publication and other biases? Study Design and Setting: An exploratory study of beliefs and practices among scientists working in the field of genetic epidemiology. A purposive sample of senior, genetic scientists was selected (N = 6) and informants were interviewed face to face. Results: There was some consensus that the issue of nonreplication might be particularly problematic in genetic epidemiology, and that publication bias could contribute to this. The informants suggested that the problem lay mainly with the publication process. Publication of negative results was seen as important but fraught with difficulties. Conclusion: Possible solutions included education of editors, and reviewers, dissemination of negative findings through Web sites or accessible data archives and pooling of data. However, none of these were perceived to be straightforward given the current pressures on the research industry. (C) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1312 / 1318
页数:7
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]   PUBLICATION BIAS - A PROBLEM IN INTERPRETING MEDICAL DATA [J].
BEGG, CB ;
BERLIN, JA .
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES A-STATISTICS IN SOCIETY, 1988, 151 :419-463
[2]   The new genetics - The new genetics in clinical practice [J].
Bell, J .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1998, 316 (7131) :618-620
[3]   'Medicine's next goldmine?' The implications of new genetic health technologies for the health service [J].
Calnan M. ;
Wainwright D. ;
Glasner P. ;
Newbury-Ecob R. ;
Ferlie E. .
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 2006, 9 (1) :33-41
[4]   Problems of reporting genetic associations with complex outcomes [J].
Colhoun, HM ;
McKeigue, PM ;
Smith, GD .
LANCET, 2003, 361 (9360) :865-872
[5]   FACTORS INFLUENCING PUBLICATION OF RESEARCH RESULTS - FOLLOW-UP OF APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED TO 2 INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS [J].
DICKERSIN, K ;
MIN, YI ;
MEINERT, CL .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1992, 267 (03) :374-378
[6]   Where now for meta-analysis? [J].
Egger, M ;
Ebrahim, S ;
Smith, GD .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2002, 31 (01) :1-5
[7]   Genetic associations in large versus small studies: an empirical assessment [J].
Ioannidis, JPA ;
Trikalinos, TA ;
Ntzani, EE ;
Contopoulos-Ioannidis, DG .
LANCET, 2003, 361 (9357) :567-571
[8]   Early extreme contradictory estimates may appear in published research: The Proteus phenomenon in molecular genetics research and randomized trials [J].
Ioannidis, JPA ;
Trikalinos, TA .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2005, 58 (06) :543-549
[9]   Effect of the statistical significance of results on the time to completion and publication of randomized efficacy trials [J].
Ioannidis, JPA .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1998, 279 (04) :281-286
[10]   Replication validity of genetic association studies [J].
Ioannidis, JPA ;
Ntzani, EE ;
Trikalinos, TA ;
Contopoulos-Ioannidis, DG .
NATURE GENETICS, 2001, 29 (03) :306-309