EssayRedundancy, disaggregation, and the integrity of medical research
References (30)
- et al.
Risperidone versus clozapine in the treatment of schizophrenic patients with acute symptoms: a double blind randomized trial
Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry
(1994) - et al.
A fixed-dose, parallel group study of risperidone vs haloperidol vs placebo
Schizophr Res
(1993) - et al.
Meta-analysis and multiple publication of clinical trial reports
Lancet
(1992) Methodology and overt and hidden bias in reports of 196 double-blind trials of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in rheumatoid arthritis
Contr Clin Trials
(1989)Irresponsible authorship and wasteful publication
Ann Intern Med
(1986)- et al.
Redundant publication: a reminder
N Engl J Med
(1995) - et al.
Randomized, double-blind controlled trial of risperidone versus clozapine in patients with chronic schizophrenia
J Clin Psychopharmacol
(1995) Risperidone: clinical development: North American results
Clin Neuropharmacol
(1992)- et al.
A Canadian multicentre placebo-controlled study of fixed doses of risperidone and haloperidol in the treatment of chronic schizophrenic patients
J Clin Psychopharmacol
(1993) - et al.
Risperidone in the treatment of schizophrenia
Am J Psychiatry
(1994)
Efficacy of risperidone on positive features of schizophrenia
J Clin Psychiatry
Risperidone
Pharmacotherapy
Risperidone versus zuclopenthixol in the treatment of acute schizophrenic episodes: a double-blind parallel-group trial
Acta Psychiatr Scand
Cited by (147)
Twenty percent of secondary publications of randomized controlled trials of drugs did not provide new results relative to the primary publication
2020, Journal of Clinical EpidemiologyCitation Excerpt :A study of duplicate publications of RCTs in the field of perioperative medicine (anesthesia, analgesia, and critical care) identified six different patterns of secondary publications based on the analysis of the samples and outcomes reported [7]. Some experts consider that secondary publications constitute a waste of time for stakeholders in medical research, publishers, and authors of systematic reviews and prevent readers from obtaining a clear view of a trial's results [1,8]. Secondary publications also mean that the same data set may be included several times in a systematic review or meta-analysis, which means that a study may have a too important weight (being considered several times), thus invalidating the estimated pooled effect size [1,9].
Knowledge dissemination in clinical trials: Exploring influences of institutional support and type of innovation on selective reporting
2018, Research PolicyCitation Excerpt :To capture the influences of both initiatives (considering a lag of 2 years for the ICMJE initiative), I added a variable ‘Published After 2007′ (1 = year of article publication > = 2007). Past studies have indicated that the production of multiple publications from single studies can lead to bias in a number of ways (e.g., Huston and Moher, 1996). Thus, I added the natural log transformation of the number of references that are associated to the trial, as reported in the Cochrane reviews (‘Papers’).
Criteria for the evidence-based categorisation of skin sensitisers
2017, Food and Chemical ToxicologyOn Recycling Our Own Work in the Digital Age
2024, Springer International Handbooks of EducationTrust but verify: An analysis of redundant publications from two major psychiatry journals in India
2022, Indian Journal of PsychiatryPsychiatry: From Its Historical and Philosophical Roots to the Modern Face
2021, Psychiatry: From Its Historical and Philosophical Roots to the Modern Face