Article type
Abstract
"Background: Precise documentation of outcome metrics is essential for accurately understanding the findings of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, researchers often selectively report the outcomes of RCTs to obtain positive results.
Objectives: To assess the prevalence of outcome selection bias in RCTs related to acute ischemic stroke, seeks to identify the determinants contributing to this bias.
Methods: This study searched for RCTs on the treatment of acute ischemic stroke published between 2020 and 2022 in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Registration information was extracted from international trial registries and compared with the information reported in the publications. A multilevel linear regression model was used for correlation measurements.
Results: In the studies included, approximately 90% percent demonstrated selective reporting. Notably, only one study offered a rationale for its selective reporting practices. The investigation delineates two primary catalysts for the occurrence of selective reporting: a propensity among researchers to downgrade, obscure, or report outcomes with ambiguity subsequent to encountering negative results (OR: 17.28; 95%CI: 8.69 - 34.34; P <0.01); and were more likely to upgrade registered outcomes, change their scope of measurement, or add new unregistered outcomes after obtaining positive results (OR: 1.79; 95%CI: 1.25 - 2.57; P <0.01).
Conclusions: Selective reporting remains a significant issue in recently published RCTs on the treatment of acute ischemic stroke. Both researchers and journal editors should recognize the role of clinical trial registries in enhancing trial transparency and actively take steps to ensure that all outcome measures, whether negative or positive, are comprehensively and accurately reported.
"
Objectives: To assess the prevalence of outcome selection bias in RCTs related to acute ischemic stroke, seeks to identify the determinants contributing to this bias.
Methods: This study searched for RCTs on the treatment of acute ischemic stroke published between 2020 and 2022 in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Registration information was extracted from international trial registries and compared with the information reported in the publications. A multilevel linear regression model was used for correlation measurements.
Results: In the studies included, approximately 90% percent demonstrated selective reporting. Notably, only one study offered a rationale for its selective reporting practices. The investigation delineates two primary catalysts for the occurrence of selective reporting: a propensity among researchers to downgrade, obscure, or report outcomes with ambiguity subsequent to encountering negative results (OR: 17.28; 95%CI: 8.69 - 34.34; P <0.01); and were more likely to upgrade registered outcomes, change their scope of measurement, or add new unregistered outcomes after obtaining positive results (OR: 1.79; 95%CI: 1.25 - 2.57; P <0.01).
Conclusions: Selective reporting remains a significant issue in recently published RCTs on the treatment of acute ischemic stroke. Both researchers and journal editors should recognize the role of clinical trial registries in enhancing trial transparency and actively take steps to ensure that all outcome measures, whether negative or positive, are comprehensively and accurately reported.
"