Positive‐outcome Bias: Comparison of Emergency Medicine and General Medicine Literatures

Ronald M Moscati · Dietrich V. K. Jehle · David G. Ellis · Albert B. Fiorello

43 citations0/0 files storedAcademic Emergency Medicine

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Meta-analysis and systematic reviews Academic Publishing and Open Access Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The existence of positive-outcome bias in the medical literature is well established. Positive-outcome bias in two emergency medicine journals was compared with that found in two general medicine journals. METHODS: Published original contributions from Annals of Emergency Medicine, American Journal of Emergency Medicine, JAMA, and New England Journal of Medicine were reviewed. Articles were categorized as demonstrating a positive or negative outcome or showing no difference using new criteria. Descriptive articles were excluded. RESULTS: Of 700 articles reviewed, 177 emergency medicine and 211 general medicine articles met the study criteria. The emergency medicine journals had 142 articles (80%) with positive outcomes, 27 (15%) with negative outcomes, and 8 (5%) with no difference. The general medicine journals had 169 articles (80%) with positive outcomes, 33 (16%) with negative outcomes, and 9 (4%) with no difference. There was no significant difference between journal groups (chi-square; p = 0.99). The power of the study was 0.80 to detect a difference of 15% between groups with alpha set at 0.05. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in the proportions of positive-outcome studies published in this sample of the emergency medicine literature compared with the general medicine literature. The potential impact of positive-outcome bias and methods of dealing with the problem are reviewed.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 43 citations exist upstream.

References

1979The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results.1991Publication bias in clinical research 1990The Existence of Publication Bias and Risk Factors for Its Occurrence 1987Meta-Analysis in Clinical Research 1987Meta-Analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials 1959Publication Decisions and their Possible Effects on Inferences Drawn from Tests of Significance—or Vice Versa 1988Publication Bias: A Problem in Interpreting Medical Data 1986Publication bias: the case for an international registry of clinical trials.

Cited by

2012Publication bias in meta-analyses of the efficacy of psychotherapeutic interventions for depression.2006PUBLICATION BIAS IN PAPERS PRESENTED TO THE AUSTRALIAN ORTHOPAEDIC ASSOCIATION ANNUAL SCIENTIFIC MEETING 2018Nonpublication Rates and Characteristics of Registered Randomized Clinical Trials in Digital Health: Cross-Sectional Analysis 2005Rating Methodological Quality: Toward Improved Assessment and Investigation 2019HARK Side of Deep Learning -- From Grad Student Descent to Automated Machine Learning

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.