Positive reasons for publishing negative findings

Am J Gastroenterol. 2008 Sep;103(9):2181-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2008.02028.x. Epub 2008 Jul 30.

Abstract

Scientific and medical authors tend to be biased toward submitting "statistically significant" findings for publication. Journals show a similar bias in publishing such "positive" studies. The large number of publications in medical research means that, in a field obsessed with controlling Type I error rates, we have journals with an abundance of Type I errors. Failing to publish studies that do not show a treatment or exposure effect creates a literature conspicuously absent of trials necessary for unbiased meta-analyses and systematic reviews. Furthermore, by shelving or rejecting studies with nonstatistically significant outcomes, authors and editors censor the most important contributors to medical research: our consenting volunteers.

Publication types

  • Comment

MeSH terms

  • Biomedical Research
  • Clinical Trials as Topic / statistics & numerical data*
  • Crohn Disease / drug therapy
  • Data Interpretation, Statistical
  • Everolimus
  • Humans
  • Immunosuppressive Agents / therapeutic use
  • Publication Bias*
  • Publishing* / ethics
  • Sirolimus / analogs & derivatives
  • Sirolimus / therapeutic use
  • Treatment Failure

Substances

  • Immunosuppressive Agents
  • Everolimus
  • Sirolimus