SynthesisPloS one2014
Why are medical and health-related studies not being published? A systematic review of reasons given by investigators.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 4 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
42 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Mesenchymal stem cells injections in traumatology and orthopaedics: common practice or still a promising area with many uncertainties?BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Pooled it
- Publication and related biases in health services research: a systematic review of empirical evidence.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Pooled it
- Ethical arguments concerning human-animal chimera research: a systematic review.BMC medical ethics · 2020Pooled it
- Outcomes of nurse practitioner-led care in patients with cardiovascular disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of advanced nursing · 2020Pooled it
- ALG-020572, an Antisense Oligonucleotide for the Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B Virus Infection Discontinued for Drug-Induced Liver Injury.Journal of viral hepatitis · 2026Trial
- The insufficient publication of early-phase clinical trials in oncology.The oncologist · 2026Article
- Rating Down for Publication Bias is Rare in Cochrane Reviews: A Descriptive Study.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2026Article
- Barriers and enablers for publishing results of randomized trials: a cross-sectional survey of principal investigators in sub-Saharan Africa.Research integrity and peer review · 2026Article
- Perceptions of challenges in clinical pediatric research: a survey of Italian pediatricians.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Non-Publication of Interventional Studies for Uveal Melanoma.Ocular oncology and pathology · 2026Article
- Can Non-Neurosurgeons Operate on Traumatic Brain Injuries in Non-Metropolitan Areas? A Scoping Review.Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA · 2025Article
- A Methodological Quality Assessment of Meta-Analyses on Sleep Disorder Treatments Using AMSTAR 2.Brain and behavior · 2024Review
- Difficult Terrains of Research Publications Faced by Researchers: A Cross-Sectional Study.Cureus · 2024Article
- If a Tree Falls in the Forest: Publication Inflation in Infectious Diseases.Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada = Journal officiel de l'Association pour la microbiologie medicale et l'infectiologie Canada · 2024Article
- On the value of meta-research for early career researchers: A commentary.JCPP advances · 2024Article
- How do children's hospitals address health inequalities: a grey literature scoping review.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Temporal Trends in Severe Brain Injury and Associated Outcomes in Very Preterm Infants.Neonatology · 2024Article
- Therapeutic angiogenesis for patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia: promising or hoax?Vascular biology (Bristol, England) · 2024Review
- Publicatus Interruptus: An Endemic Syndrome Disabling Research and Researchers.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Article
- Gray Literature in Evaluating Effectiveness in Digital Health and Health and Welfare Technology: A Source Worth Considering.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAbout half of medical and health-related studies are not published. We conducted a systematic review of reports on reasons given by investigators for not publishing their studies in peer-reviewed journals.
methodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and SCOPUS (until 13/09/2013), and references of identified articles were searched to identify reports of surveys that provided data on reasons given by investigators for not publishing studies. The proportion of non-submission and reasons for non-publication was calculated using the number of unpublished studies as the denominator. Because of heterogeneity across studies, quantitative pooling was not conducted. Exploratory subgroup analyses were conducted.
resultsWe included 54 survey reports. Data from 38 included reports were available to estimate proportions of at least one reason given for not publishing studies. The proportion of non-submission among unpublished studies ranged from 55% to 100%, with a median of 85%. The reasons given by investigators for not publishing their studies included: lack of time or low priority (median 33%), studies being incomplete (median 15%), study not for publication (median 14%), manuscript in preparation or under review (median 12%), unimportant or negative result (median 12%), poor study quality or design (median 11%), fear of rejection (median 12%), rejection by journals (median 6%), author or co-author problems (median 10%), and sponsor or funder problems (median 9%). In general, the frequency of reasons given for non-publication was not associated with the source of unpublished studies, study design, or time when a survey was conducted.
conclusionsNon-submission of studies for publication remains the main cause of non-publication of studies. Measures to reduce non-publication of studies and alternative models of research dissemination need to be developed to address the main reasons given by investigators for not publishing their studies, such as lack of time or low priority and fear of being rejected by journals.
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.