Journal article
Citation bias favoring statistically significant studies was present in medical research.
- Jannot AS CRC & Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Health and Community Medicine, University of Geneva and University Hospitals of Geneva, Rue Gabrielle Perret-Gentil 6, 1211 GENEVE 14, Switzerland. anne-sophie.jannot@hcuge.ch
- Agoritsas T
- Gayet-Ageron A
- Perneger TV
- 2013-01-26
Published in:
- Journal of clinical epidemiology. - 2013
Biomedical Research
Data Interpretation, Statistical
Humans
Journal Impact Factor
Poisson Distribution
Publication Bias
English
OBJECTIVE
Statistically significant studies may be cited more than negative studies on the same topic. We aimed to assess here whether such citation bias is present across the medical literature.
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING
We conducted a cohort study of the association between statistical significance and citations. We selected all therapeutic intervention studies included in meta-analyses published between January and March 2010 in the Cochrane database, and retrieved citation counts of all individual studies using ISI Web of Knowledge. The association between the statistical significance of each study and the number of citations it received between 2008 and 2010 was assessed in mixed Poisson models.
RESULTS
We identified 89 research questions addressed in 458 eligible articles. Significant studies were cited twice as often as nonsignificant studies (multiplicative effect of significance: 2.14, 95% confidence interval: 1.38-3.33). This association was partly because of the higher impact factor of journals where significant studies are published (adjusted multiplicative effect of significance: 1.14, 95% confidence interval: 0.87-1.51).
CONCLUSION
A citation bias favoring significant results occurs in medical research. As a consequence, treatments may seem more effective to the readers of medical literature than they really are.
Statistically significant studies may be cited more than negative studies on the same topic. We aimed to assess here whether such citation bias is present across the medical literature.
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING
We conducted a cohort study of the association between statistical significance and citations. We selected all therapeutic intervention studies included in meta-analyses published between January and March 2010 in the Cochrane database, and retrieved citation counts of all individual studies using ISI Web of Knowledge. The association between the statistical significance of each study and the number of citations it received between 2008 and 2010 was assessed in mixed Poisson models.
RESULTS
We identified 89 research questions addressed in 458 eligible articles. Significant studies were cited twice as often as nonsignificant studies (multiplicative effect of significance: 2.14, 95% confidence interval: 1.38-3.33). This association was partly because of the higher impact factor of journals where significant studies are published (adjusted multiplicative effect of significance: 1.14, 95% confidence interval: 0.87-1.51).
CONCLUSION
A citation bias favoring significant results occurs in medical research. As a consequence, treatments may seem more effective to the readers of medical literature than they really are.
- Language
-
- English
- Open access status
- closed
- Identifiers
-
- DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.09.015
- PMID 23347853
- Persistent URL
- https://sonar.rero.ch/global/documents/220279
Statistics
Document views: 14
File downloads: