Many scenarios exist for selective inclusion and reporting of results in randomized trials and systematic reviews

Ref ID 386
First Author M. J. Page
Journal JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Year Of Publishing 2013
URL https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(12)00346-0/fulltext
Keywords • Multiplicity
• Cochrane
• General medical
Problem(s) • Multiplicity of outcomes and lack of pre-specification for outcome reporting
• Unplanned or unjustified subgroup or sensitivity analyses
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country Australia
Aim To assess the ways in which selective inclusion and reporting can occur in randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews by examining methodological reports describing empirically investigated or hypothetical examples of selective inclusion or reporting.
Level of Investigation Descriptive
Summary of Findings Eight categories (from 27 examples) of selective inclusion in systematic reviews, and eight categories (from 33 examples) of selective reporting in systematic reviews were collated. These describe scenarios in which multiple outcomes or multiple data for the same outcome are available, yet only a subset is included or reported; outcome data are reported with inadequate detail; or outcome data are given different prominence through its placement across or within reports.
Number of systematic reviews included 64
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 2859
Treatment impacted No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description