Trends in Publication of Negative Studies in Prominent Indian Medical Journals
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5455/njcm.20211129094633Keywords:
Negative Studies, Prevalence, Trends, Indian Medical JournalsAbstract
Background: Publication of negative studies is as important as positive studies as absence of one may lead to publication bias. Available data based on very few published studies suggests a very strong publication bias for publication of only positive studies and declining trends for publication of negative studies. In spite of a thorough review similar data on trend analysis of publication of negative studies for Indian Medical Journals could not be found. Present study is an attempt to estimate the prevalence and trends in publication of negative studies in selected Indian Medical Journals.
Materials and Methods: Indian clinical practice and clinical specialties journals having an impact factor (Indexed in SCI) with publication history of 12 years or more were included in the analysis. A total of 12 journals were eligible for the inclusion. All the original articles published in these journals were analysed and studies were labeled as negative or positive based on predefined criteria. Statistics: Descriptive statistics was reported in the form of frequency, percentage and 95%CI. Fisher exact test was used for comparison of categorical variable and excel was used for linear regression and trend.
Results: Out of total 6341 articles published in amongst these 12 journals between year 2000 to 2011, 284 (4.4%, 95% CI 4.0% to 5.0%) were negative studies. Slight positive trend in the publication of negative studies was observed. It was observed that there were significantly more negative studies were published in the journals having impact factor >1 as compared to journals having impact factor <1 (151/4415 Vs 133/1926, Fisher exact P =0.0000001).
Conclusion: Prevalence and trend of publication of negative studies in prominent Indian Medical Journal shows strong publication bias that needs to be addressed on priority at various levels.
References
Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Publishing and Editorial Issues Related to Publication in Biomedical Journals: Obligation to Publish Negative Studies. http://www.icmje.org/publishing_1negative.html.
Reynolds T. Eliminating Publication Bias: The Effect of Nega-tive Trial Results. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92(9):682. doi: 10.1093/jnci/92.9.682.
Pautasso M. Worsening file-drawer problem in the abstracts of natural, medical and social science databases. Scientometrics 2010;85(1):193-202.
Kyzas PA, Denaxa-Kyza D, Ioannidis JP. Almost all articles on cancer prognostic markers report statistically significant re-sults. Eur J Cancer 2007;43:2559–2579. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca. 2007.08.030
Kavvoura FK, Liberopoulos G, Ioannidis JPA. Selection in re-ported epidemiological risks: An empirical assessment. PLoS Med 2007;4: e79. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040079.
Fanelli Daniele. Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries Scientometrics 2012;90:891–904.
Ioannidis JPA. Why most published research findings are false. Plos Medicine 2005;2(8):696–701.
Littner Y, Mimouni FB, Dollberg S, Mandel D. Negative result and impact factor: A lesion from neonatology. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2005;158(11):1036-7.
Senn S. Authors are also reviewers: problems in assigning cause for missing negative studies. F1000Research 2013;2:17.
Yaphe J, Edman R, Knishkowy B, Herman J. The association between funding by commercial interests and study outcome in randomized controlled drug trials. Fam Pract. 2001 Dec; 18(6): 565-8.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The authors retain the copyright of their article, with first publication rights granted to Medsci Publications.