Barriers to and facilitators of interventions to counter publication bias: thematic analysis of scholarly articles and stakeholder interviews.

BACKGROUND: When the nature and direction of research results affect their chances of publication, a distortion of the evidence base - termed publication bias - results. Despite considerable recent efforts to implement measures to reduce the non-publication of trials, publication bias is still a major problem in medical research. The objective of our study was to identify barriers to and facilitators of interventions to prevent or reduce publication bias. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the scholarly literature and extracted data from articles. Further, we performed semi-structured interviews with stakeholders. We performed an inductive thematic analysis to identify barriers to and facilitators of interventions to counter publication bias. RESULTS: The systematic review identified 39 articles. Thirty-four of 89 invited interview partners agreed to be interviewed. We clustered interventions into four categories: prospective trial registration, incentives for reporting in peer-reviewed journals or research reports, public availability of individual patient-level data, and peer-review/editorial processes. Barriers we identified included economic and personal interests, lack of financial resources for a global comprehensive trial registry, and different legal systems. Facilitators identified included: raising awareness of the effects of publication bias, providing incentives to make data publically available, and implementing laws to enforce prospective registration and reporting of clinical trial results. CONCLUSIONS: Publication bias is a complex problem that reflects the complex system in which it occurs. The cooperation amongst stakeholders to increase public awareness of the problem, better tailoring of incentives to publish, and ultimately legislative regulations have the greatest potential for reducing publication bias.

Neurosurgical Needs and Assets Assessment of Public Hospitals in Uganda: An Eevaluation of Mulago Hospital to Inform Neurosurgical Program Planning at Mbarara

Background: Since 2007, there has been an ongoing collaboration between Duke University and Mulago National Referral Hospital (NRH) in Kampala, Uganda to increase surgical capacity. This program is prepared to expand to other sites within Uganda to improve neurosurgery outside of Kampala as well. This study assessed the existing progress at Mulago NRH and the neurosurgical needs and assets at two potential sites for expansion. Methods: Three public hospitals were visited to assess needs and assets: Mulago NRH, Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital (RRH), and Gulu RRH. At each site, a surgical capacity tool was administered and healthcare workers were interviewed about perceived needs and assets. A total of 39 interviews were conducted between the three sites. Thematic analysis of the interviews was conducted to identify the reported needs and assets at each hospital. Results: Some improvements are needed to the Duke-Mulago Collaboration model prior to expansion; minor changes to the neurosurgery residency program as well as the method for supply donation and training provided during neurosurgery camps need to examined. Neurosurgery can be implemented at Mbarara RRH currently but the hospital needs a biomedical equipment technician on staff immediately. Gulu RRH is not well positioned for Neurosurgery until there is a CT Scanner somewhere in the Northern Region of Uganda or at the hospital. Conclusions: Neurosurgery is already present in Uganda on a small scale and needs rapid expansion to meet patient needs. This progression is possible with prudent allocation of resources on strategic equipment purchases, human resources including clinical staff and biomedical staff, and changes to the supply chain management system.