Intravenous magnesium for acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND: Mortality and morbidity from acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remain high. Intravenous magnesium started early after the onset of AMI is thought to be a promising adjuvant treatment. Conflicting results from earlier trials and meta-analyses warrant a systematic review of available evidence. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effect of intravenous magnesium versus placebo on early mortality and morbidity. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2006), MEDLINE (January 1966 to June 2006) and EMBASE (January 1980 to June 2006), and the Chinese Biomedical Disk (CBM disk) (January 1978 to June 2006). Some core Chinese medical journals relevant to the cardiovascular field were hand searched from their starting date to the first-half year of 2006. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized controlled trials that compared intravenous magnesium with placebo in the presence or absence of fibrinolytic therapy in addition to routine treatment were eligible if they reported mortality and morbidity within 35 days of AMI onset. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed the trial quality and extracted data using a standard form. Odds ratio (OR) were used to pool the effect if appropriate. Where heterogeneity of effects was found, clinical and methodological sources of this were explored. MAIN RESULTS: For early mortality where there was evidence of heterogeneity, a fixed-effect meta-analysis showed no difference between magnesium and placebo groups (OR 0.99, 95%CI 0.94 to 1.04), while a random-effects meta-analysis showed a significant reduction comparing magnesium with placebo (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.82). Stratification by timing of treatment (< 6 hrs, 6+ hrs) reduced heterogeneity, and in both fixed-effect and random-effects models no significant effect of magnesium was found. In stratified analyses, early mortality was reduced for patients not treated with thrombolysis (OR=0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.94 by random-effects model) and for those treated with less than 75 mmol of magnesium (OR=0.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.70) in the magnesium compared with placebo groups.Meta-analysis for the secondary outcomes where there was no evidence of heterogeneity showed reductions in the odds of ventricular fibrillation (OR=0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.96), but increases in the odds of profound hypotension (OR=1.13, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.19) and bradycardia (OR=1.49, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.77) comparing magnesium with placebo. No difference was observed for heart block (OR=1.05, 95% CI 0.97-1.14). For those outcomes where there was evidence of heterogeneity, meta-analysis with both fixed-effect and random-effects models showed that magnesium could decrease ventricular tachycardia (OR=0.45, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.66 by fixed-effect model; OR=0.40, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.84 by random-effects model) and severe arrhythmia needing treatment or Lown 2-5 (OR=0.72, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.85 by fixed-effect model; OR=0.51, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.79 by random-effects model) compared with placebo. There was no difference on the effect of cardiogenic shock between the two groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Owing to the likelihood of publication bias and marked heterogeneity of treatment effects, it is essential that the findings are interpreted cautiously. From the evidence reviewed here, we consider that: (1) it is unlikely that magnesium is beneficial in reducing mortality both in patients treated early and in patients treated late, and in patients already receiving thrombolytic therapy; (2) it is unlikely that magnesium will reduce mortality when used at high dose (>=75 mmol); (3) magnesium treatment may reduce the incidence of ventricular fibrillation, ventricular tachycardia, severe arrhythmia needing treatment or Lown 2-5, but it may increase the incidence of profound hypotension, bradycardia and flushing; and (4) the areas of uncertainty regarding the effect of magnesium on mortality remain the effect of low dose treatment (< 75 mmol) and in patients not treate...

Cancer, meta-analysis and reporting biases: the case of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents.

Reporting and publication bias is a well-known problem in meta-analysis and healthcare research. In 2002 we conducted a meta-analysis on the effects of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) on overall survival in cancer patients, which suggested some evidence for improved survival in patients receiving ESAs compared with controls. However, a meta-analysis of individual patient data conducted several years later showed the opposite of our first meta-analysis, that is, evidence for increased on-study mortality and reduced overall survival in cancer patients receiving ESAs. We aimed to determine whether the results of our first meta-analysis could have been affected by publication and reporting biases and, if so, whether timely access to clinical study reports and individual patient data could have prevented this. We conducted a hypothetical meta-analysis for overall survival including all studies and study data that could have been available in 2002, at the time when we conducted our first meta-analysis. Compared with our original meta-analysis, which suggested an overall survival benefit for cancer patients receiving ESAs [hazard ratio (HR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67‒0.99], our hypothetical meta-analysis based on the results of all studies conducted at the time of the first analysis did not show evidence for a beneficial effect of ESAs on overall survival (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.83‒1.12). Thus we have to conclude that our first meta-analysis showed misleading overall survival benefits due to publication and reporting biases, which could have been prevented by timely access to clinical study reports and individual patient data. Unrestricted access to clinical study protocols including amendments, clinical study reports and individual patient data is needed to ensure timely detection of both beneficial and harmful effects of healthcare interventions.

Systematic reviews published in higher impact clinical journals were of higher quality.

OBJECTIVES To compare the methodological quality of systematic reviews (SRs) published in high- and low-impact factor (IF) Core Clinical Journals. In addition, we aimed to record the implementation of aspects of reporting, including Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram, reasons for study exclusion, and use of recommendations for interventions such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING We searched PubMed for systematic reviews published in Core Clinical Journals between July 1 and December 31, 2012. We evaluated the methodological quality using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool. RESULTS Over the 6-month period, 327 interventional systematic reviews were identified with a mean AMSTAR score of 63.3% (standard deviation, 17.1%), when converted to a percentage scale. We identified deficiencies in relation to a number of quality criteria including delineation of excluded studies and assessment of publication bias. We found that SRs published in higher impact journals were undertaken more rigorously with higher percentage AMSTAR scores (per IF unit: β = 0.68%; 95% confidence interval: 0.32, 1.04; P < 0.001), a discrepancy likely to be particularly relevant when differences in IF are large. CONCLUSION Methodological quality of SRs appears to be better in higher impact journals. The overall quality of SRs published in many Core Clinical Journals remains suboptimal.

Psychological therapies for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia in adults: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Panic disorder is characterised by the presence of recurrent unexpected panic attacks, discrete periods of fear or anxiety that have a rapid onset and include symptoms such as racing heart, chest pain, sweating and shaking. Panic disorder is common in the general population, with a lifetime prevalence of 1% to 4%. A previous Cochrane meta-analysis suggested that psychological therapy (either alone or combined with pharmacotherapy) can be chosen as a first-line treatment for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia. However, it is not yet clear whether certain psychological therapies can be considered superior to others. In order to answer this question, in this review we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA), in which we compared eight different forms of psychological therapy and three forms of a control condition. OBJECTIVES To assess the comparative efficacy and acceptability of different psychological therapies and different control conditions for panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, in adults. SEARCH METHODS We conducted the main searches in the CCDANCTR electronic databases (studies and references registers), all years to 16 March 2015. We conducted complementary searches in PubMed and trials registries. Supplementary searches included reference lists of included studies, citation indexes, personal communication to the authors of all included studies and grey literature searches in OpenSIGLE. We applied no restrictions on date, language or publication status. SELECTION CRITERIA We included all relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on adults with a formal diagnosis of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia. We considered the following psychological therapies: psychoeducation (PE), supportive psychotherapy (SP), physiological therapies (PT), behaviour therapy (BT), cognitive therapy (CT), cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT), third-wave CBT (3W) and psychodynamic therapies (PD). We included both individual and group formats. Therapies had to be administered face-to-face. The comparator interventions considered for this review were: no treatment (NT), wait list (WL) and attention/psychological placebo (APP). For this review we considered four short-term (ST) outcomes (ST-remission, ST-response, ST-dropouts, ST-improvement on a continuous scale) and one long-term (LT) outcome (LT-remission/response). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS As a first step, we conducted a systematic search of all relevant papers according to the inclusion criteria. For each outcome, we then constructed a treatment network in order to clarify the extent to which each type of therapy and each comparison had been investigated in the available literature. Then, for each available comparison, we conducted a random-effects meta-analysis. Subsequently, we performed a network meta-analysis in order to synthesise the available direct evidence with indirect evidence, and to obtain an overall effect size estimate for each possible pair of therapies in the network. Finally, we calculated a probabilistic ranking of the different psychological therapies and control conditions for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS We identified 1432 references; after screening, we included 60 studies in the final qualitative analyses. Among these, 54 (including 3021 patients) were also included in the quantitative analyses. With respect to the analyses for the first of our primary outcomes, (short-term remission), the most studied of the included psychological therapies was CBT (32 studies), followed by BT (12 studies), PT (10 studies), CT (three studies), SP (three studies) and PD (two studies).The quality of the evidence for the entire network was found to be low for all outcomes. The quality of the evidence for CBT vs NT, CBT vs SP and CBT vs PD was low to very low, depending on the outcome. The majority of the included studies were at unclear risk of bias with regard to the randomisation process. We found almost half of the included studies to be at high risk of attrition bias and detection bias. We also found selective outcome reporting bias to be present and we strongly suspected publication bias. Finally, we found almost half of the included studies to be at high risk of researcher allegiance bias.Overall the networks appeared to be well connected, but were generally underpowered to detect any important disagreement between direct and indirect evidence. The results showed the superiority of psychological therapies over the WL condition, although this finding was amplified by evident small study effects (SSE). The NMAs for ST-remission, ST-response and ST-improvement on a continuous scale showed well-replicated evidence in favour of CBT, as well as some sparse but relevant evidence in favour of PD and SP, over other therapies. In terms of ST-dropouts, PD and 3W showed better tolerability over other psychological therapies in the short term. In the long term, CBT and PD showed the highest level of remission/response, suggesting that the effects of these two treatments may be more stable with respect to other psychological therapies. However, all the mentioned differences among active treatments must be interpreted while taking into account that in most cases the effect sizes were small and/or results were imprecise. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is no high-quality, unequivocal evidence to support one psychological therapy over the others for the treatment of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia in adults. However, the results show that CBT - the most extensively studied among the included psychological therapies - was often superior to other therapies, although the effect size was small and the level of precision was often insufficient or clinically irrelevant. In the only two studies available that explored PD, this treatment showed promising results, although further research is needed in order to better explore the relative efficacy of PD with respect to CBT. Furthermore, PD appeared to be the best tolerated (in terms of ST-dropouts) among psychological treatments. Unexpectedly, we found some evidence in support of the possible viability of non-specific supportive psychotherapy for the treatment of panic disorder; however, the results concerning SP should be interpreted cautiously because of the sparsity of evidence regarding this treatment and, as in the case of PD, further research is needed to explore this issue. Behaviour therapy did not appear to be a valid alternative to CBT as a first-line treatment for patients with panic disorder with or without agoraphobia.

A systematic review of clostridium difficile infection in patients with iatrogenic immunesuppression

Background: Incidence of C. difficile infection (CDI) has increased dramatically in the past decade and is the most frequent cause of nosocomial infectious diarrhea. The outcome of infection may range from mild diarrhea to life-threatening pseudomembranous colitis depending on the immunological response of the host, which is highly compromised in this special population that includes bone marrow transplant (BMT), solid organ transplant (SOT) and cancer patients on cytotoxic chemotherapy. ^ Objectives: We conducted a meta-analysis to assess the incidence rates of CDI and the time to onset of infection in patients with iatrogenic immune suppression. ^ Methods: Original studies were identified through an extensive search of electronic databases including PubMed, Ovid Medline (R), RefWorks and Biological Abstracts and their references. The overall incidence rate of CDI in the immune suppressed population was calculated using random effects model and their 95% confidence interval was derived. Differences in the incidence of CDI and time to onset of infection were calculated between the groups and within the groups. Publication bias was assessed using a funnel plot. Results: Twenty nine published articles involving 7,424 patients met the eligibility requirements. The overall incidence of CDI in the immune suppressed population is 11.1% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 9.2–13.4%). The incidence of CDI was higher in SOT patients (14.2%, 95% CI: 6.8–21.5%); (p-value-0.022) and in cancer patients on cytotoxic chemotherapy (11.4%, 95% CI: 8.4–15.4%); (p = 0.042) than in BMT patients (10.5%, 95% CI: 7.9–13.1%). In a subgroup analysis of BMT population, the incidence of CDI is significantly higher in patients who received allogeneic BMT (15.1%, 95% CI: 11.2–20.0%; p value <0.0001). Similarly, in the SOT population, the incidence of CDI was higher in patients who underwent liver transplantation (11.0%, 95% CI: 5.6–20.3%); (p= 0.0672). The median time to onset of infection was shorter in BMT patients (p=0.0025). ^ Conclusions: It is evident from the combined analysis of these 29 published studies that the incidence of CDI in the immune suppressed population is higher. However, early diagnosis and treatment of CDI will help reduce the morbidity and mortality due to CDI in this special population.^

A systematic review of personalized therapy in patients with advanced cancer

Background: An increased understanding of the pathogenesis of cancer at the molecular level has led to the development of personalized cancer therapy based on the mutation status of the tumor. Tailoring treatments to genetic signatures has improved treatment outcomes in patients with advanced cancer. We conducted a meta-analysis to provide a quantitative summary of the response to treatment on a phase I clinical trial matched to molecular aberration in patients with advanced solid tumors. ^ Methods: Original studies that reported the results of phase I clinical trials in patients with advanced cancer treated with matched anti-cancer therapies between January 2006 and November 2011 were identified through an extensive search of Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases. Odds Ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was estimated for each study to assess the strength of an association between objective response rate (ORR) and mutation status. Random effects model was used to estimate the pooled OR and their 95% CI was derived. Funnel plot was used to assess publication bias. ^ Results: Thirteen studies published between January 2006 and November 2011that reported on responses to matched phase I clinical trials in patients with advanced cancer were included in the meta-analysis. Nine studies reported on the responses seen in 538 of the 835 patients with driver mutations responsive to therapy and seven studies on the responses observed in 234 of the 306 patients with mutation predictive for negative response. Random effects model was used to estimate pooled OR, which was 7.767(95% CI = 4.199 − 14.366; p-value=0.000) in patients with activating mutations that were responsive to therapy and 0.287 (95% CI = 0.119 − 0.694; p-value=0.009) in patients with mutation predictive of negative response. ^ Conclusion: It is evident from the meta-analysis that somatic mutations present in tumor tissue of patients are predictive of responses to therapy in patients with advanced cancer in phase I setting. Plethora of research and growing evidence base indicate that selection of patients based on mutation analysis of the tumor and personalizing therapy is a step forward in the war against cancer.^

Análisis sobre la eficacia de niveles moderados de actividad física para reducir el riesgo de padecer enfermedades cardiovasculares : Un Meta-análisis

Objetivos: a. Determinar la eficacia de la actividad física en la reducción del riesgo de enfermedades cardiovasculares; b. Analizar los cambios relativos en los niveles de riesgo a padecer enfermedades cardiovasculares de acuerdo a diferentes intensidades (baja-moderada) de actividad física. Metodología: Se realizó un Meta-análisisde los estudios encontrados en la base de datos PUBMED. Se calculó el tamaño del efecto medio y se aplicó el test de Eggerpara descartar un posible sesgo de publicación. Al detectarse heterogeneidad, se procedió a realizar un análisis de las variables moderadoras. Resultados: Se obtuvo un tamaño del efecto medio de 0.762 (0.678-0857; 95 por ciento IC). El test de Egger arrojó un p-valor de 0.67 (I.C. 0.95), de manera tal que se confirmó la ausencia de sesgo de publicación. El análisis moderador determinó que los años de seguimiento (p=0.000; 95 por ciento IC) y los países de estudio (p=0.0096; 95 por ciento IC) son significativos. Conclusión: Se puede concluir en que la práctica de actividad física a intensidades moderadas ofrece un efecto protector sobre los individuos que la realizan disminuyendo el riesgo a padecer enfermedades cardiovasculares

Análisis sobre la eficacia de niveles moderados de actividad física para reducir el riesgo de padecer enfermedades cardiovasculares : Un Meta-análisis

Objetivos: a. Determinar la eficacia de la actividad física en la reducción del riesgo de enfermedades cardiovasculares; b. Analizar los cambios relativos en los niveles de riesgo a padecer enfermedades cardiovasculares de acuerdo a diferentes intensidades (baja-moderada) de actividad física. Metodología: Se realizó un Meta-análisisde los estudios encontrados en la base de datos PUBMED. Se calculó el tamaño del efecto medio y se aplicó el test de Eggerpara descartar un posible sesgo de publicación. Al detectarse heterogeneidad, se procedió a realizar un análisis de las variables moderadoras. Resultados: Se obtuvo un tamaño del efecto medio de 0.762 (0.678-0857; 95 por ciento IC). El test de Egger arrojó un p-valor de 0.67 (I.C. 0.95), de manera tal que se confirmó la ausencia de sesgo de publicación. El análisis moderador determinó que los años de seguimiento (p=0.000; 95 por ciento IC) y los países de estudio (p=0.0096; 95 por ciento IC) son significativos. Conclusión: Se puede concluir en que la práctica de actividad física a intensidades moderadas ofrece un efecto protector sobre los individuos que la realizan disminuyendo el riesgo a padecer enfermedades cardiovasculares

Análisis sobre la eficacia de niveles moderados de actividad física para reducir el riesgo de padecer enfermedades cardiovasculares : Un Meta-análisis

Objetivos: a. Determinar la eficacia de la actividad física en la reducción del riesgo de enfermedades cardiovasculares; b. Analizar los cambios relativos en los niveles de riesgo a padecer enfermedades cardiovasculares de acuerdo a diferentes intensidades (baja-moderada) de actividad física. Metodología: Se realizó un Meta-análisisde los estudios encontrados en la base de datos PUBMED. Se calculó el tamaño del efecto medio y se aplicó el test de Eggerpara descartar un posible sesgo de publicación. Al detectarse heterogeneidad, se procedió a realizar un análisis de las variables moderadoras. Resultados: Se obtuvo un tamaño del efecto medio de 0.762 (0.678-0857; 95 por ciento IC). El test de Egger arrojó un p-valor de 0.67 (I.C. 0.95), de manera tal que se confirmó la ausencia de sesgo de publicación. El análisis moderador determinó que los años de seguimiento (p=0.000; 95 por ciento IC) y los países de estudio (p=0.0096; 95 por ciento IC) son significativos. Conclusión: Se puede concluir en que la práctica de actividad física a intensidades moderadas ofrece un efecto protector sobre los individuos que la realizan disminuyendo el riesgo a padecer enfermedades cardiovasculares

Multinationality-performance relationship:a meta-analysis

- We conduct a Meta-analysis of 54 papers that study the relationship between multinationality and firm performance. The aim is to understand if any systematic relationships exist between the characteristics of each study and the reported results of linear and curvilinear regressions to examine the multinationality-performance relationship. - Our main finding, robust to different specifications and to different weights for each observation, is that when analysis is based on non-US data, the reported return to multinationality is higher. However, this relationship for non-US firms is usually U-shaped rather than inverted U-shaped. This indicates that US firms face lower returns to internationalization than other firms but are less likely to incur losses in the early stages of internationalization. - The findings also highlight the differences that are reported when comparing regression and non-regression based techniques. Our results suggest that in this area regression based analysis is more reliable than say ANOVA or other related approaches. - Other characteristics that influence the estimated rate of return and its shape across different studies are: the measure of multinationality used; size distribution of the sample; and the use of market-based indicators to measure firm performance. Finally, we find no evidence of publication bias.

Efficacy and safety of second-generation antipsychotic long-acting injections (SGA LAIs) in maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder:protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION: Bipolar disorder requires long-term treatment but non-adherence is a common problem. Antipsychotic long-acting injections (LAIs) have been suggested to improve adherence but none are licensed in the UK for bipolar. However, the use of second-generation antipsychotics (SGA) LAIs in bipolar is not uncommon albeit there is a lack of systematic review in this area. This study aims to systematically review safety and efficacy of SGA LAIs in the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The protocol is based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and will include only randomised controlled trials comparing SGA LAIs in bipolar. PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), PsychINFO, LiLACS, http://www.clinicaltrials.gov will be searched, with no language restriction, from 2000 to January 2016 as first SGA LAIs came to the market after 2000. Manufacturers of SGA LAIs will also be contacted. Primary efficacy outcome is relapse rate or delayed time to relapse or reduction in hospitalisation and primary safety outcomes are drop-out rates, all-cause discontinuation and discontinuation due to adverse events. Qualitative reporting of evidence will be based on 21 items listed on standards for reporting qualitative research (SRQR) focusing on study quality (assessed using the Jadad score, allocation concealment and data analysis), risk of bias and effect size. Publication bias will be assessed using funnel plots. If sufficient data are available meta-analysis will be performed with primary effect size as relative risk presented with 95% CI. Sensitivity analysis, conditional on number of studies and sample size, will be carried out on manic versus depressive symptoms and monotherapy versus adjunctive therapy.

Lateral epicondylitis and physical exposure at work? A review of prospective studies and meta-analysis

International audience

Speeding stroke recovery? A systematic review of amphetamine after stroke

Introduction: The use of drugs to enhance recovery (“rehabilitation pharmacology”) has been assessed. Amphetamine can improve outcome in experimental models of stroke, and several small clinical trials have assessed its use in stroke. Methods: Electronic searches were performed to identify randomised controlled trials of amphetamine in stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic). Outcomes included functional outcome (assessed as combined death or disability/dependency), safety (death) and haemodynamic measures. Data were analysed as dichotomous or continuous outcomes, using odds ratios (OR), weighted or standardised mean difference, (WMD or SMD) using random-effects models with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI); statistical heterogeneity was assessed. Results: Eleven completed trials (n=329) were identified. Treatment with amphetamine was associated with non-significant trends to increased death (OR 2.78 (95% CI, 0.75– 10.23), n=329, 11 trials) and improved motor scores (WMD 3.28 (95% CI −0.48–7.04) n=257, 9 trials) but had no effect on the combined outcome of death and dependency (OR 1.15 (95% CI 0.65–2.06, n=206, 5 trials). Amphetamine increased systolic blood pressure (WMD 9.3 mmHg, 95% CI 3.3–15.3, n=106, 3 trials) and heart rate (WMD 7.6 beats per minute (bpm), 95% CI 1.8–13.4, n=106, 3 trials). Despite variations in treatment regimes, outcomes and follow-up duration there was no evidence of significant heterogeneity or publication bias. Conclusion: No evidence exists at present to support the use of amphetamine after stroke. Despite a trend to improved motor function, doubts remain over

Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor in experimental stroke and its effects on infarct size and functional outcome: a systematic review

Background Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) shows promise as a treatment for stroke. This systematic review assesses G-CSF in experimental ischaemic stroke. Methods Relevant studies were identified with searches of Medline, Embase and PubMed. Data were extracted on stroke lesion size, neurological outcome and quality, and analysed using Cochrane Review Manager using random effects models; results are expressed as standardised mean difference (SMD) and odds ratio (OR). Results Data were included from 19 publications incorporating 666 animals. G-CSF reduced lesion size significantly in transient (SMD -1.63, p<0.00001) but not permanent (SMD -1.56, p=0.11) focal models of ischaemia. Lesion size was reduced at all doses and with treatment commenced within 4 hours of transient ischaemia. Neurological deficit (SMD -1.37, p=0.0004) and limb placement (SMD -1.88, p=0.003) improved with G-CSF; however, locomotor activity (>4 weeks post ischaemia) was not (SMD 0.76, p=0.35). Death (OR 0.27, p<0.0001) was reduced with G-CSF. Median study quality was 4 (range 0-7/8); Egger’s test suggested significant publication bias (p=0.001). Conclusions G-CSF significantly reduced lesion size in transient but not permanent models of ischaemic stroke. Motor impairment and death were also reduced. Further studies assessing dose-response, administration time, length of ischaemia and long-term functional recovery are needed.

Extent of non-publication in cohorts of studies approved by research ethics committees or included in trial registries

BACKGROUND: The synthesis of published research in systematic reviews is essential when providing evidence to inform clinical and health policy decision-making. However, the validity of systematic reviews is threatened if journal publications represent a biased selection of all studies that have been conducted (dissemination bias). To investigate the extent of dissemination bias we conducted a systematic review that determined the proportion of studies published as peer-reviewed journal articles and investigated factors associated with full publication in cohorts of studies (i) approved by research ethics committees (RECs) or (ii) included in trial registries. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Four bibliographic databases were searched for methodological research projects (MRPs) without limitations for publication year, language or study location. The searches were supplemented by handsearching the references of included MRPs. We estimated the proportion of studies published using prediction intervals (PI) and a random effects meta-analysis. Pooled odds ratios (OR) were used to express associations between study characteristics and journal publication. Seventeen MRPs (23 publications) evaluated cohorts of studies approved by RECs; the proportion of published studies had a PI between 22% and 72% and the weighted pooled proportion when combining estimates would be 46.2% (95% CI 40.2%-52.4%, I2 = 94.4%). Twenty-two MRPs (22 publications) evaluated cohorts of studies included in trial registries; the PI of the proportion published ranged from 13% to 90% and the weighted pooled proportion would be 54.2% (95% CI 42.0%-65.9%, I2 = 98.9%). REC-approved studies with statistically significant results (compared with those without statistically significant results) were more likely to be published (pooled OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.2-3.5). Phase-III trials were also more likely to be published than phase II trials (pooled OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.6-2.5). The probability of publication within two years after study completion ranged from 7% to 30%. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial part of the studies approved by RECs or included in trial registries remains unpublished. Due to the large heterogeneity a prediction of the publication probability for a future study is very uncertain. Non-publication of research is not a random process, e.g., it is associated with the direction of study findings. Our findings suggest that the dissemination of research findings is biased.