Publication Bias in Antipsychotic Trials: An Analysis of Efficacy Comparing the Published Literature to the US Food and Drug Administration Database
Erick H. Turner; Daniel Knoepflmacher; Lee Shapley · 2012 · PLoS Medicine
WASTE classifies this as Negative / Null Result Report · AI classification, approximate
The study found no significant effect — useful as a negative control or null benchmark for your own design.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Publication bias compromises the validity of evidence-based medicine, yet a growing body of research shows that this problem is widespread. Efficacy data from drug regulatory agencies, e.g., the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), can serve as a benchmark or control against which data in journal articles can be checked. Thus one may determine whether publication bias is present and quantify the extent to which it inflates apparent drug efficacy. METHODS AND FINDINGS: FDA Drug Approval Packages for eight second-generation antipsychotics-aripiprazole, iloperidone, olanzapine, pali
Abstract by Erick H. Turner; Daniel Knoepflmacher; Lee Shapley, PLoS Medicine (2012) — licensed CC BY 4.0.
About to run something similar?
Run an AI Precheck on your own design to catch failure modes like this one before you spend the time. Your first desk check is free.
Related failures
Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science
Negative / Null Result ReportWillingness to Share Research Data Is Related to the Strength of the Evidence and the Quality of Reporting of Statistical Results
Methods Dead-EndComparing multiple comparisons: practical guidance for choosing the best multiple comparisons test
Replication FailureInferential Statistics as Descriptive Statistics: There Is No Replication Crisis if We Don’t Expect Replication
Negative / Null Result ReportMOBILE BANKING ADOPTION: APPLICATION OF DIFFUSION OF INNOVATION THEORY
Negative / Null Result ReportEnjoyment and social influence: predicting mobile payment adoption
WASTE indexes this work — it does not host or republish it. Failure-type classification is automated and approximate.
Metadata source: OpenAlex · DOI 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001189