ArticleACR open rheumatology2023
Time to Publication and Time-Lag Publication Bias for Randomized Trials on Connective Tissue Diseases.
Article in ACR open rheumatology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Is any research ever truly bias-free? The myth of objectivity in science.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the time from completion to publication of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on connective tissue diseases (CTDs), investigate the factors associated with, and explore the influence of significance of study results on time to publication (time-lag publication bias).
methodsWe included interventional, phase 2/3, 3, or 4 RCTs on CTDs registered in Clinicaltrials.gov from 2000 to 2016, whose results had been published in a peer-review journal less than 5 years after their completion. Main trial features, including the significance of primary outcome results, were collected. Time to publication was the time from study completion to the earliest publication date. Multivariable linear regression was used to identify factors associated with time to publication.
resultsWe included 62 studies, mostly phase 3 (61%) trials on pharmacologic treatments (94%); we recruited patients with systemic lupus (55%) or systemic sclerosis (23%) and planned to enroll a median of 131 (IQR [interquartile range]: 61-288) patients. Twenty-two (35%) reported at least a statistically significant primary outcome. Median time to publication was 28 months (IQR: 17-36). In a multivariable analysis, time to publication progressively improved over time (faster publication in recent years, with the average time to publication decreasing by 1.3 [95% CI: 0.3-2.3] months per year) and was not influenced by the significance of primary outcome results, funder, impact factor of the journal, number of recruiting countries, and comparator.
conclusionA high proportion of CTDs-RCTs is published beyond 2 years from completion. We did not find evidence of time-lag publication bias, and time to publication improved over time.
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.