ArticleJRSM open2016
No difference found in time to publication by statistical significance of trial results: a methodological review.
Article in JRSM open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Research Paradigm Mismatch: How Patients and Health Care Professionals Seek Health-Related Information Online.The Permanente journal · 2026Article
- Article
- Time to Publication and Time-Lag Publication Bias for Randomized Trials on Connective Tissue Diseases.ACR open rheumatology · 2023Article
- Article
- Are the ecological effects of the "worst" marine invasive species linked with scientific and media attention?PloS one · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTime-lag from study completion to publication is a potential source of publication bias in randomised controlled trials. This study sought to update the evidence base by identifying the effect of the statistical significance of research findings on time to publication of trial results.
designLiterature searches were carried out in four general medical journals from June 2013 to June 2014 inclusive (
settingMethodological review of four general medical journals.
participantsOriginal research articles presenting the primary analyses from phase 2, 3 and 4 parallel-group randomised controlled trials were included.
main outcome measuresTime from trial completion to publication.
resultsThe median time from trial completion to publication was 431 days (
conclusionIn contrast to previous studies, this review did not demonstrate the presence of time-lag bias in time to publication. This may be a result of these articles being published in four high-impact general medical journals that may be more inclined to publish rapidly, whatever the findings. Further research is needed to explore the presence of time-lag bias in lower quality studies and lower impact 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.