SynthesisThe Journal of investigative dermatology2012
Prospective registration and outcome-reporting bias in randomized controlled trials of eczema treatments: a systematic review.
Synthesis in The Journal of investigative dermatology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.
- High Outcome-Reporting Bias in Randomized-Controlled Trials of Acupuncture for Cancer Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Epidemiological Study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Pooled it
- Estimating the prevalence of discrepancies between study registrations and publications: a systematic review and meta-analyses.BMJ open · 2023Pooled it
- Registration of published randomized trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2018Pooled it
- A systematic review of comparisons between protocols or registrations and full reports in primary biomedical research.BMC medical research methodology · 2018Pooled it
- A systematic review of the processes used to link clinical trial registrations to their published results.Systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Systematic review: Outcome reporting bias is a problem in high impact factor neurology journals.PloS one · 2017Pooled it
- Comparison of registered and published outcomes in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review.BMC medicine · 2015Pooled it
- Methodological and Systematic Errors in Systematic Reviews in Health Domain: A Systematic Review.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2025Review
- Frequency of multiple changes to prespecified primary outcomes of clinical trials completed between 2009 and 2017 in German university medical centers: A meta-research study.PLoS medicine · 2023Article
- Methods Reporting Quality and its Association with Methods Section Length: A Cross-sectional Assessment of STROBE and CONSORT Reporting Adherence in Top-cited Dermatology Journals.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2023Article
- Evaluating publication bias for clinical trials supporting new dermatologic drug approvals from 2003 to 2018.Archives of dermatological research · 2023Article
- Assessing the compliance of systematic review articles published in leading dermatology journals with the PRISMA statement guidelines: A systematic review.JAAD international · 2020Review
- Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials for the Treatment of Eczema with Chinese Patent Medicine Based on the CONSORT-CHM Formulas 2017.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2020Article
- Comparison of Clinical Trial Changes in Primary Outcome and Reported Intervention Effect Size Between Trial Registration and Publication.JAMA network open · 2019Article
- Trial registration as a safeguard against outcome reporting bias and spin? A case study of randomized controlled trials of acupuncture.PloS one · 2019Article
- Registration and Outcome-Reporting Bias in Randomized Controlled Trials of Distal Radial Fracture Treatment.JB & JS open access · 2018Article
- Publication proportions for registered breast cancer trials: before and following the introduction of the ClinicalTrials.gov results database.Research integrity and peer review · 2016Article
- How Often Do Comparative Randomised Controlled Trials in the Field of Eczema Fail to Directly Compare the Treatments Being Tested?Journal of clinical medicine · 2015Article
- Clinical trials submitted to the JID: place your bet and show us your hand.The Journal of investigative dermatology · 2015Article
- Declaration of transparency for each research article.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
We assessed completeness of trial registration and the extent of outcome-reporting bias in published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of eczema (atopic dermatitis) treatments by surveying all relevant RCTs published from January 2007 to July 2011 located in a database called the Global Resource of Eczema Trials (GREAT). The GREAT database is compiled by searching six bibliographic databases, including EMBASE and MEDLINE. Out of 109 identified RCTs, only 37 (34%) had been registered on an approved trial register. Only 18 out of 109 trials (17%) had been registered "properly" in terms of submitting the registration before the trial end date and nominating a primary outcome. The proportion of "any registered" and "properly registered" RCTs increased from 19% and 10% in 2007 to 57% and 36% in 2011, respectively. Assessment of selective outcome-reporting bias was difficult even among the properly registered trials owing to unclear primary outcome description especially with regard to timing. Only 5 out of the 109 trials (5%) provided enough information for us to be confident that the outcomes reported in the published trial were consistent with the original registration. Adequate trial registration and description of primary outcomes for eczema RCTs is currently poor.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.