Risk of publication bias in therapeutic interventions for COVID-19
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | preprint |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | SciELO Preprints |
Texto Completo: | https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/2511 |
Resumo: | Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are secondary research designs that constitute a reference to guide decision-making. Faced with the pandemic, many investigations are published at an accelerated rate, which is why various organizations have proposed to keep them updated through “live reviews”. Even if developed with great methodological rigor, publication bias can represent a threat to their validity. The characteristics of publication bias, the regulatory ways to avoid it, and statistical tools to suspect it are described. Publication bias is defined as hiding or delaying publication and / or withholding data from research studies. Up to half of the controlled trials that are conducted remain unpublished, due to various interests. A recent and shocking example was that of Oseltamivir during the H1N1 pandemic. The delay in publishing results of studies funded by the industry led to the purchase of a drug that, later, it was learned, had no relevant beneficial effects. Various initiatives propose regulating the publication and registration of clinical trials to reduce this bias, and some statistical techniques allow us to suspect it. It is exemplified by a statistical analysis to assess publication bias in three therapeutic interventions related to COVID-19: Corticosteroids, Ivermectin and Tocilizumab. |
id |
SCI-1_44c8f41c48537918b093d033428996cc |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ops.preprints.scielo.org:preprint/2511 |
network_acronym_str |
SCI-1 |
network_name_str |
SciELO Preprints |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Risk of publication bias in therapeutic interventions for COVID-19Riesgo de sesgo de publicación en intervenciones terapéuticas para el COVID-19metaanalysissystematic reviewCOVID-19publication biasmetaanalisisrevision sistematicaCOVID-19sesgo de publicacionSystematic reviews and meta-analyses are secondary research designs that constitute a reference to guide decision-making. Faced with the pandemic, many investigations are published at an accelerated rate, which is why various organizations have proposed to keep them updated through “live reviews”. Even if developed with great methodological rigor, publication bias can represent a threat to their validity. The characteristics of publication bias, the regulatory ways to avoid it, and statistical tools to suspect it are described. Publication bias is defined as hiding or delaying publication and / or withholding data from research studies. Up to half of the controlled trials that are conducted remain unpublished, due to various interests. A recent and shocking example was that of Oseltamivir during the H1N1 pandemic. The delay in publishing results of studies funded by the industry led to the purchase of a drug that, later, it was learned, had no relevant beneficial effects. Various initiatives propose regulating the publication and registration of clinical trials to reduce this bias, and some statistical techniques allow us to suspect it. It is exemplified by a statistical analysis to assess publication bias in three therapeutic interventions related to COVID-19: Corticosteroids, Ivermectin and Tocilizumab.Las revisiones sistemáticas y meta-análisis son diseños de investigación secundaria que constituyen una referencia para guiar la toma de decisiones. Ante la pandemia, un gran número de investigaciones se publican a un ritmo acelerado, por lo que diversas organizaciones han propuesto mantenerlas actualizadas a través de “revisiones vivas”. Aun siendo desarrollados con gran rigor metodológico, el sesgo de publicación puede representar una amenaza a su validez. Se describen las características de los sesgos de publicación, las vías regulatorias para evitarlo y herramientas estadísticas para sospecharlo. Se define sesgo de publicación como el hecho de ocultar o retrasar la publicación y/o retener datos surgidos de los estudios de investigación. Hasta la mitad de los ensayos controlados que se realizan permanecen sin publicarse, a causa de diversos intereses. Un ejemplo reciente e impactante fue el acontecido con oseltamivir durante la pandemia H1N1. El ocultamiento y la demora en publicar resultados de estudios financiados por la industria llevó a comprar un medicamento que, luego se supo, no tenía efectos beneficiosos relevantes. Diversas iniciativas proponen regular la publicación y registro de ensayos clínicos, para reducir este sesgo, y algunas técnicas estadísticas permiten sospecharlo. Se ejemplifica mediante un análisis estadístico de valoración de sesgo de publicación en tres intervenciones terapéuticas relacionadas con COVID-19: corticoides, ivermectina y tocilizumab.SciELO PreprintsSciELO PreprintsSciELO Preprints2021-06-23info:eu-repo/semantics/preprintinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/251110.1590/SciELOPreprints.2511enghttps://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/article/view/2511/4316Copyright (c) 2021 Santiago Hasdeu, Fernando Tortosahttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessHasdeu, SantiagoTortosa, Fernandoreponame:SciELO Preprintsinstname:SciELOinstacron:SCI2021-06-18T19:30:41Zoai:ops.preprints.scielo.org:preprint/2511Servidor de preprintshttps://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scieloONGhttps://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/oaiscielo.submission@scielo.orgopendoar:2021-06-18T19:30:41SciELO Preprints - SciELOfalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Risk of publication bias in therapeutic interventions for COVID-19 Riesgo de sesgo de publicación en intervenciones terapéuticas para el COVID-19 |
title |
Risk of publication bias in therapeutic interventions for COVID-19 |
spellingShingle |
Risk of publication bias in therapeutic interventions for COVID-19 Hasdeu, Santiago metaanalysis systematic review COVID-19 publication bias metaanalisis revision sistematica COVID-19 sesgo de publicacion |
title_short |
Risk of publication bias in therapeutic interventions for COVID-19 |
title_full |
Risk of publication bias in therapeutic interventions for COVID-19 |
title_fullStr |
Risk of publication bias in therapeutic interventions for COVID-19 |
title_full_unstemmed |
Risk of publication bias in therapeutic interventions for COVID-19 |
title_sort |
Risk of publication bias in therapeutic interventions for COVID-19 |
author |
Hasdeu, Santiago |
author_facet |
Hasdeu, Santiago Tortosa, Fernando |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Tortosa, Fernando |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Hasdeu, Santiago Tortosa, Fernando |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
metaanalysis systematic review COVID-19 publication bias metaanalisis revision sistematica COVID-19 sesgo de publicacion |
topic |
metaanalysis systematic review COVID-19 publication bias metaanalisis revision sistematica COVID-19 sesgo de publicacion |
description |
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are secondary research designs that constitute a reference to guide decision-making. Faced with the pandemic, many investigations are published at an accelerated rate, which is why various organizations have proposed to keep them updated through “live reviews”. Even if developed with great methodological rigor, publication bias can represent a threat to their validity. The characteristics of publication bias, the regulatory ways to avoid it, and statistical tools to suspect it are described. Publication bias is defined as hiding or delaying publication and / or withholding data from research studies. Up to half of the controlled trials that are conducted remain unpublished, due to various interests. A recent and shocking example was that of Oseltamivir during the H1N1 pandemic. The delay in publishing results of studies funded by the industry led to the purchase of a drug that, later, it was learned, had no relevant beneficial effects. Various initiatives propose regulating the publication and registration of clinical trials to reduce this bias, and some statistical techniques allow us to suspect it. It is exemplified by a statistical analysis to assess publication bias in three therapeutic interventions related to COVID-19: Corticosteroids, Ivermectin and Tocilizumab. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-06-23 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/preprint info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
preprint |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/2511 10.1590/SciELOPreprints.2511 |
url |
https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/2511 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.1590/SciELOPreprints.2511 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/article/view/2511/4316 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Santiago Hasdeu, Fernando Tortosa https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Santiago Hasdeu, Fernando Tortosa https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
SciELO Preprints SciELO Preprints SciELO Preprints |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
SciELO Preprints SciELO Preprints SciELO Preprints |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:SciELO Preprints instname:SciELO instacron:SCI |
instname_str |
SciELO |
instacron_str |
SCI |
institution |
SCI |
reponame_str |
SciELO Preprints |
collection |
SciELO Preprints |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
SciELO Preprints - SciELO |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
scielo.submission@scielo.org |
_version_ |
1797047823569518592 |