Bias in dissemination of clinical research findings: structured OPEN framework of what, who and why, based on literature review and expert consensus.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to review highly cited articles that focus on non-publication of studies, and to develop a consistent and comprehensive approach to defining (non-) dissemination of research findings. SETTING: We performed a scoping review of definitions of the term 'publication bias' in highly cited publications. PARTICIPANTS: Ideas and experiences of a core group of authors were collected in a draft document, which was complemented by the findings from our literature search. INTERVENTIONS: The draft document including findings from the literature search was circulated to an international group of experts and revised until no additional ideas emerged and consensus was reached. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: We propose a new approach to the comprehensive conceptualisation of (non-) dissemination of research. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Our 'What, Who and Why?' approach includes issues that need to be considered when disseminating research findings (What?), the different players who should assume responsibility during the various stages of conducting a clinical trial and disseminating clinical trial documents (Who?), and motivations that might lead the various players to disseminate findings selectively, thereby introducing bias in the dissemination process (Why?). CONCLUSIONS: Our comprehensive framework of (non-) dissemination of research findings, based on the results of a scoping literature search and expert consensus will facilitate the development of future policies and guidelines regarding the multifaceted issue of selective publication, historically referred to as 'publication bias'.

Headspace needle-trap analysis of priority volatile organic compounds from aqueous samples: application to the analysis of natural and waste waters

Combining headspace (HS) sampling with a needle-trap device (NTD) to determine priority volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in water samples results in improved sensitivity and efficiency when compared to conventional static HS sampling. A 22 gauge stainless steel, 51-mm needle packed with Tenax TA and Carboxen 1000 particles is used as the NTD. Three different HS-NTD sampling methodologies are evaluated and all give limits of detection for the target VOCs in the ng L−1 range. Active (purge-and-trap) HS-NTD sampling is found to give the best sensitivity but requires exhaustive control of the sampling conditions. The use of the NTD to collect the headspace gas sample results in a combined adsorption/desorption mechanism. The testing of different temperatures for the HS thermostating reveals a greater desorption effect when the sample is allowed to diffuse, whether passively or actively, through the sorbent particles. The limits of detection obtained in the simplest sampling methodology, static HS-NTD (5 mL aqueous sample in 20 mL HS vials, thermostating at 50 °C for 30 min with agitation), are sufficiently low as to permit its application to the analysis of 18 priority VOCs in natural and waste waters. In all cases compounds were detected below regulated levels

A Formal Framework for Specifying, Reusing and Implementing Educational Settings. Second level

Peer-reviewed