Intended for healthcare professionals

  1. Research
  2. “Hardly worth the...
  3. “Hardly worth the effort”? Medical journals’ policies and their editors’ and publishers’ views on trial registration and publication bias: quantitative and qualitative study
CCBYNC Open access
Research

“Hardly worth the effort”? Medical journals’ policies and their editors’ and publishers’ views on trial registration and publication bias: quantitative and qualitative study

BMJ 2013; 347 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f5248 (Published 06 September 2013) Cite this as: BMJ 2013;347:f5248

Data supplement

  • Web Extra

    Extra material supplied by the author

    Files in this Data Supplement:

    • Data Supplement - Journals included in quantitative analysis
    • Data Supplement - Journals included by requirements for trial registration and whether they stated that trials must comply with Declaration of Helsinki
    • Data Supplement - Publication bias: interview questions

Related articles

See more

Cited by...

  • Prospective Trial Registration and Publication Rates of Randomized Clinical Trials in Digital Health: A Cross Sectional Analysis of Global Trial Registries
  • Peer reviewed evaluation of registered end-points of randomised trials (the PRE-REPORT study): protocol for a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised trial
  • Assessing Confidence in the Results of Network Meta-Analysis (Cinema)
  • Characteristics and publication fate of unregistered and retrospectively registered clinical trials submitted to The BMJ over 4 years
  • Promote scientific integrity via journal peer review data
  • Bias in dissemination of clinical research findings: structured OPEN framework of what, who and why, based on literature review and expert consensus
  • Trends in global clinical trial registration: an analysis of numbers of registered clinical trials in different parts of the world from 2004 to 2013
  • Trial registration 10 years on
  • The knowledge system underpinning healthcare is not fit for purpose and must change
  • Evidence-informed recommendations to reduce dissemination bias in clinical research: conclusions from the OPEN (Overcome failure to Publish nEgative fiNdings) project based on an international consensus meeting
  • Call to improve transparency of trials of non-regulated interventions
  • Clinical trials: what a waste
  • How transparent are migraine clinical trials?: Repository of Registered Migraine Trials (RReMiT)
  • Impact of sending email reminders of the legal requirement for posting results on ClinicalTrials.gov: cohort embedded pragmatic randomized controlled trial
  • Medical journal editors and publication bias
  • We need to ask "what is the purpose of research?"
  • Health Research Authority's great leap forward on UK trial registration
Back to top