Publication bias in five dental implant journals: An observation from 2005 to 2009
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2011 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/11449/227159 |
Resumo: | Purpose: This study evaluated possible publication bias and its related factors in implant-related research over time. Materials and Methods: Articles published in Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, Clinical Oral Implants Research, Implant Dentistry, Journal of Oral Implantology, and The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants between 2005 and 2009 were reviewed. Nonoriginal articles were excluded. For each article included, study outcome, extramural funding source, type of study, and geographic origin were recorded. Descriptive and analytic statistics (a = .05), including the chi-square test and logistic regression analysis, were performed where appropriate. Results: From a total of 2,085 articles, 1,503 met the inclusion criteria. Of the articles analyzed, 1,226 (81.6%), 160 (10.6%), and 117 (7.8%) articles reported positive, negative, and neutral outcomes, respectively. In vitro studies, studies from Asia, and funded animal studies were more likely to report positive outcomes compared to others (P = .02, P < .0001, and P = .009, respectively). Industry-funded studies represented the lowest frequency of positive outcomes versus studies funded by other sources. Conclusions: There were a high number of implant-related studies reporting positive outcomes in the five selected journals. Some selected factors were associated with positive outcome bias. In general, funding was not associated with a positive outcome, except for animal studies. Industry-supported research did not show any association with the publication of positive outcomes. © 2011 by Quintessence Publishing Co Inc. |
id |
UNSP_797fc59f26b82b7c8eeb69732b88486c |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/227159 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Publication bias in five dental implant journals: An observation from 2005 to 2009Dental implantsFundingIndustryPublication biasPurpose: This study evaluated possible publication bias and its related factors in implant-related research over time. Materials and Methods: Articles published in Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, Clinical Oral Implants Research, Implant Dentistry, Journal of Oral Implantology, and The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants between 2005 and 2009 were reviewed. Nonoriginal articles were excluded. For each article included, study outcome, extramural funding source, type of study, and geographic origin were recorded. Descriptive and analytic statistics (a = .05), including the chi-square test and logistic regression analysis, were performed where appropriate. Results: From a total of 2,085 articles, 1,503 met the inclusion criteria. Of the articles analyzed, 1,226 (81.6%), 160 (10.6%), and 117 (7.8%) articles reported positive, negative, and neutral outcomes, respectively. In vitro studies, studies from Asia, and funded animal studies were more likely to report positive outcomes compared to others (P = .02, P < .0001, and P = .009, respectively). Industry-funded studies represented the lowest frequency of positive outcomes versus studies funded by other sources. Conclusions: There were a high number of implant-related studies reporting positive outcomes in the five selected journals. Some selected factors were associated with positive outcome bias. In general, funding was not associated with a positive outcome, except for animal studies. Industry-supported research did not show any association with the publication of positive outcomes. © 2011 by Quintessence Publishing Co Inc.Department of Restorative Dentistry College of Dentistry University of Illinois at ChicagoDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics Aracatuba Dental School Universidade Estadual Paulista, Aracatuba, Sao PauloDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics Aracatuba Dental School Universidade Estadual Paulista, Aracatuba, Sao PauloUniversity of Illinois at ChicagoUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)Yuan, Judy Chia-ChunShyamsunder, NodeshBarão, Valentim Adelino Ricardo [UNESP]Lee, Damian J.Sukotjo, Cortino2022-04-29T07:11:47Z2022-04-29T07:11:47Z2011-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article1024-1032International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, v. 26, n. 5, p. 1024-1032, 2011.0882-2786http://hdl.handle.net/11449/2271592-s2.0-84875881448Scopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengInternational Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implantsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-04-29T07:11:47Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/227159Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-08-05T22:32:59.700221Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Publication bias in five dental implant journals: An observation from 2005 to 2009 |
title |
Publication bias in five dental implant journals: An observation from 2005 to 2009 |
spellingShingle |
Publication bias in five dental implant journals: An observation from 2005 to 2009 Yuan, Judy Chia-Chun Dental implants Funding Industry Publication bias |
title_short |
Publication bias in five dental implant journals: An observation from 2005 to 2009 |
title_full |
Publication bias in five dental implant journals: An observation from 2005 to 2009 |
title_fullStr |
Publication bias in five dental implant journals: An observation from 2005 to 2009 |
title_full_unstemmed |
Publication bias in five dental implant journals: An observation from 2005 to 2009 |
title_sort |
Publication bias in five dental implant journals: An observation from 2005 to 2009 |
author |
Yuan, Judy Chia-Chun |
author_facet |
Yuan, Judy Chia-Chun Shyamsunder, Nodesh Barão, Valentim Adelino Ricardo [UNESP] Lee, Damian J. Sukotjo, Cortino |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Shyamsunder, Nodesh Barão, Valentim Adelino Ricardo [UNESP] Lee, Damian J. Sukotjo, Cortino |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
University of Illinois at Chicago Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Yuan, Judy Chia-Chun Shyamsunder, Nodesh Barão, Valentim Adelino Ricardo [UNESP] Lee, Damian J. Sukotjo, Cortino |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Dental implants Funding Industry Publication bias |
topic |
Dental implants Funding Industry Publication bias |
description |
Purpose: This study evaluated possible publication bias and its related factors in implant-related research over time. Materials and Methods: Articles published in Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, Clinical Oral Implants Research, Implant Dentistry, Journal of Oral Implantology, and The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants between 2005 and 2009 were reviewed. Nonoriginal articles were excluded. For each article included, study outcome, extramural funding source, type of study, and geographic origin were recorded. Descriptive and analytic statistics (a = .05), including the chi-square test and logistic regression analysis, were performed where appropriate. Results: From a total of 2,085 articles, 1,503 met the inclusion criteria. Of the articles analyzed, 1,226 (81.6%), 160 (10.6%), and 117 (7.8%) articles reported positive, negative, and neutral outcomes, respectively. In vitro studies, studies from Asia, and funded animal studies were more likely to report positive outcomes compared to others (P = .02, P < .0001, and P = .009, respectively). Industry-funded studies represented the lowest frequency of positive outcomes versus studies funded by other sources. Conclusions: There were a high number of implant-related studies reporting positive outcomes in the five selected journals. Some selected factors were associated with positive outcome bias. In general, funding was not associated with a positive outcome, except for animal studies. Industry-supported research did not show any association with the publication of positive outcomes. © 2011 by Quintessence Publishing Co Inc. |
publishDate |
2011 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2011-01-01 2022-04-29T07:11:47Z 2022-04-29T07:11:47Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, v. 26, n. 5, p. 1024-1032, 2011. 0882-2786 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/227159 2-s2.0-84875881448 |
identifier_str_mv |
International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, v. 26, n. 5, p. 1024-1032, 2011. 0882-2786 2-s2.0-84875881448 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/227159 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
1024-1032 |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Scopus reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) instacron:UNESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
instacron_str |
UNESP |
institution |
UNESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1808129436212527104 |