2. Bero L, Oostvogel F, Bacchetti P, Lee K. Factors Associated with Findings of Published Trials of Drug-Drug Comparisons: Why Some Statins Appear More Efficacious than Others. PLoS Med. 2007 Jun 5;4(6):e184.
3. Kelly RE Jr, Cohen LJ, Semple RJ, Bialer P, Lau A, Bodenheimer A, et al. Relationship between drug company funding and outcomes of clinical psychiatric research. Psychol Med. 2006 Nov;36(11):1647-56.
4. Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. JAMA 2003;289:454-65. Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, Clark O. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ 2003;326:1167-70.
5. Sismondo S. Pharmaceutical company funding and its consequences: A qualitative systematic review. Contemporary Clinical Trials. 2008 Mar;29(2):109-13.
6. Eyding D, Lelgemann M, Grouven U, Harter M, Kromp M, Kaiser T, et al. Reboxetine for acute treatment of major depression: systematic review and meta-analysis of published and unpublished placebo and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor controlled trials. BMJ. 2010 Oct 12;341:c4737-c4737.
7. Suntharalingam G, Perry MR, Ward S, Brett SJ, Castello-Cortes A, Brunner MD, et al. Cytokine storm in a phase 1 trial of the anti-CD28 monoclonal antibody TGN1412. N. Engl. J. Med. 2006 Sep 7;355(10):1018-28.
8. Expert Group on Phase One Clinical Trials: Final report [Internet]. 2006 [cited 2012 Apr 5]. Available from: http://www.dh. gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications /PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_063117
9. Decullier E, Chan A-W, Chapuis F. Inadequate Dissemination of Phase I Trials: A Retrospective Cohort Study. PLoS Med. 2009 Feb 17;6(2):e1000034.
10. Cowley AJ, Skene A, Stainer K, Hampton JR. The effect of lorcainide on arrhythmias and survival in patients with acute myocardial infarction: an example of publication bias. International journal of cardiology. 1993;40(2):161-6. Iain Chalmers was the first to raise TGN1412 and anti-arrhythmics as examples of the harm done when individual early trials are left unpublished. They are the best illustrations of this problem, but you should not imagine that they are unusual: the quantitative data shows that they are just two among many, many similar cases.
11. Antman EM, Lau J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC. A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction. JAMA. 1992 Jul 8;268(2):240-8.
12. Turner EH, Matthews AM, Linardatos E, Tell RA, Rosenthal R. Selective Publication of Antidepressant Trials and its Influence on Apparent Efficacy. N Engl J Med. 2008 Jan 17;358(3):252-60.
13. Here is the classic early paper arguing this point: Chalmers Iain. Underreporting Research Is Scientific Misconduct. JAMA. 1990 Mar 9;263(10):1405–1408.
14. Sterling T. Publication decisions and their possible effects on inferences drawn from tests of significance or vice versa. Am Stat Assoc J 1959;54:30-4.
15. Sterling TD, Rosenbaum WL, Weinkam JJ. Publication decisions revisited the effect of the outcome of statistical tests on the decision to publish and vice-versa. Am Stat 1995;49: 108-12.
16. Bacon F (1645). Franc Baconis de Verulamio/Summi Angliae Cancellarii/Novum organum scientiarum. [Francis Bacon of St. Albans Lord Chancellor of England. A ‘New Instrument’ for the sciences] Lugd. Bat: apud Adrianum Wiingaerde, et Franciscum Moiardum. Aphorism XLVI (p.45–46).
17. Fowler T (1786). Medical reports of the effects of arsenic in the cure of agues, remitting feveres and periodic headachs. London: J Johnson, pp 105–107.
18. Hemminki E. Study of information submitted by drug companies to licensing authorities. Br Med J. 1980 Mar 22;280(6217): 833-6.
19. Lee K, Bacchetti P, Sim I. Publication of clinical trials supporting successful new drug applications: a literature analysis. PLoS Med 2008;5(9):e191.
20. Melander H, Ahlqvist-Rastad J, Meijer G, Beermann B. Evidence b(i)ased medicine selective reporting from studies sponsored by pharmaceutical industry: review of studies in new drug applications. BMJ 2003;326:1171-3.
21. Rising K, Bacchetti P, Bero L. Reporting Bias in Drug Trials Submitted to the Food and Drug Administration: Review of Publication and Presentation. PLoS Med. 2008 Nov 25;5(11):e217.
22. Scherer RW, Langenberg P, von Elm E. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007; 2: MR000005.
23. Song F, Parekh S, Hooper L, Loke YK, Ryder J, Sutton AJ, et al. Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases. Health Technol Assess. 2010 Feb;14(8):iii, ix-xi, 1-193.
24. Dickersin K. How important is publication bias? A synthesis of available data. Aids Educ Prev 1997;9(1 SA):15–21.
25. Ioannidis J. Effect of the statistical significance of results on the time to completion and publication of randomized efficacy trials. JAMA 1998;279:281-6.