Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis

[1]  Harlan M Krumholz,et al.  Increasing value and reducing waste: addressing inaccessible research , 2014, The Lancet.

[2]  Iain Chalmers,et al.  How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set , 2014, The Lancet.

[3]  G. Omenn,et al.  Evolution of Translational Omics: Lessons Learned and the Path Forward , 2013 .

[4]  X. Bosch,et al.  Financial, nonfinancial and editors' conflicts of interest in high‐impact biomedical journals , 2013, European journal of clinical investigation.

[5]  Neelima Deshpande.  Testing Treatments: Better Research for Better Healthcare (2nd edn) , 2013, Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care.

[6]  B. Djulbegovic,et al.  Comparator bias: why comparisons must address genuine uncertainties , 2013, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[7]  Robert Tibshirani,et al.  Scientific research in the age of omics: the good, the bad, and the sloppy , 2013, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[8]  Brian A. Nosek,et al.  Reproducibility concerns , 2012, Nature Medicine.

[9]  M. Ferreira,et al.  Many Randomized Trials of Physical Therapy Interventions Are Not Adequately Registered: A Survey of 200 Published Trials , 2012, Physical Therapy.

[10]  Ethan M Balk,et al.  Influence of Reported Study Design Characteristics on Intervention Effect Estimates From Randomized, Controlled Trials , 2012, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[11]  Ulrich Dirnagl,et al.  International, Multicenter Randomized Preclinical Trials in Translational Stroke Research: It's Time to Act , 2012, Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism.

[12]  Paolo Vineis,et al.  Recommendations and proposed guidelines for assessing the cumulative evidence on joint effects of genes and environments on cancer occurrence in humans. , 2012, International journal of epidemiology.

[13]  Sander Greenland,et al.  Nonsignificance plus high power does not imply support for the null over the alternative. , 2012, Annals of epidemiology.

[14]  Mark A Hlatky,et al.  Repeat revascularization is a faulty end point for clinical trials. , 2012, Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes.

[15]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  Methodological standards and patient-centeredness in comparative effectiveness research: the PCORI perspective. , 2012, JAMA.

[16]  M. Khoury,et al.  Stakeholder assessment of the evidence for cancer genomic tests: insights from three case studies , 2012, Genetics in Medicine.

[17]  John P A Ioannidis,et al.  Research needs grants, funding and money – missing something? , 2012, European journal of clinical investigation.

[18]  I. Cuthill,et al.  Improving Bioscience Research Reporting: The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research † , 2012, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[19]  C. Begley,et al.  Drug development: Raise standards for preclinical cancer research , 2012, Nature.

[20]  David Moher,et al.  Why prospective registration of systematic reviews makes sense , 2012, Systematic Reviews.

[21]  D. Moher,et al.  The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: an international prospective register of systematic reviews , 2012, Systematic Reviews.

[22]  A E Ades,et al.  An evaluation of the feasibility, cost and value of information of a multicentre randomised controlled trial of intravenous immunoglobulin for sepsis (severe sepsis and septic shock): incorporating a systematic review, meta-analysis and value of information analysis. , 2012, Health technology assessment.

[23]  Sander Greenland,et al.  Transparency and disclosure, neutrality and balance: shared values or just shared words? , 2012, Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health.

[24]  John P A Ioannidis,et al.  Improving Validation Practices in “Omics” Research , 2011, Science.

[25]  R. Peng.  Reproducible Research in Computational Science , 2011, Science.

[26]  Muin J Khoury,et al.  Genetic epidemiology with a Capital E, ten years after , 2011, Genetic epidemiology.

[27]  John P A Ioannidis,et al.  Prognostic effect size of cardiovascular biomarkers in datasets from observational studies versus randomised trials: meta-epidemiology study , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[28]  John P A Ioannidis,et al.  Statistically significant meta-analyses of clinical trials have modest credibility and inflated effects. , 2011, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[29]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Public Availability of Published Research Data in High-Impact Journals , 2011, PloS one.

[30]  F. Prinz,et al.  Believe it or not: how much can we rely on published data on potential drug targets? , 2011, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[31]  E. Gillanders,et al.  Population Sciences, Translational Research, and the Opportunities and Challenges for Genomics to Reduce the Burden of Cancer in the 21st Century , 2011, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

[32]  Iveta Simera,et al.  Describing reporting guidelines for health research: a systematic review. , 2011, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[33]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  The False-positive to False-negative Ratio in Epidemiologic Studies , 2011, Epidemiology.

[34]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Comparison of effect sizes associated with biomarkers reported in highly cited individual articles and in subsequent meta-analyses. , 2011, JAMA.

[35]  J. Ware,et al.  Pragmatic trials--guides to better patient care? , 2011, The New England journal of medicine.

[36]  D. Moher,et al.  Open Medicine endorses PROSPERO , 2011, Open medicine : a peer-reviewed, independent, open-access journal.

[37]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  An empirical assessment of validation practices for molecular classifiers , 2011, Briefings Bioinform..

[38]  Chadi Touma,et al.  Effect of Population Heterogenization on the Reproducibility of Mouse Behavior: A Multi-Laboratory Study , 2011, PloS one.

[39]  Torsten Hothorn,et al.  Case studies in reproducibility , 2011, Briefings Bioinform..

[40]  Douglas G Altman,et al.  Comparison of protocols and registry entries to published reports for randomised controlled trials. , 2011, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[41]  Ian F Tannock,et al.  When are "positive" clinical trials in oncology truly positive? , 2011, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[42]  S. Goodman,et al.  A Systematic Examination of the Citation of Prior Research in Reports of Randomized, Controlled Trials , 2011, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[43]  Zhao Shui-ping,et al.  Criteria for Evaluation of Novel Markers of Cardiovascular Risk , 2011 .

[44]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Science mapping analysis characterizes 235 biases in biomedical research. , 2010, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[45]  L. Garrison,et al.  A formal risk-benefit framework for genomic tests: Facilitating the appropriate translation of genomics into clinical practice , 2010, Genetics in Medicine.

[46]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  The need to consider the wider agenda in systematic reviews and meta-analyses: breadth, timing, and depth of the evidence , 2010, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[47]  Hans Hillege,et al.  Quality, quantity and harmony: the DataSHaPER approach to integrating data across bioclinical studies , 2010, International journal of epidemiology.

[48]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  Expectations, validity, and reality in omics. , 2010, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[49]  Peter J Diggle,et al.  Embracing the concept of reproducible research. , 2010, Biostatistics.

[50]  Niels Keiding,et al.  Reproducible research and the substantive context. , 2010, Biostatistics.

[51]  M. Ritskes-Hoitinga,et al.  A Gold Standard Publication Checklist to Improve the Quality of Animal Studies, to Fully Integrate the Three Rs, and to Make Systematic Reviews More Feasible , 2010, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[52]  Joachim Kunert,et al.  Systematic variation improves reproducibility of animal experiments , 2010, Nature Methods.

[53]  D. Moher,et al.  A catalogue of reporting guidelines for health research , 2010, European journal of clinical investigation.

[54]  Nicolas Rasmussen,et al.  Association of trial registration with the results and conclusions of published trials of new oncology drugs , 2009, Trials.

[55]  M. Macleod,et al.  Emulating Multicentre Clinical Stroke Trials: A New Paradigm for Studying Novel Interventions in Experimental Models of Stroke , 2009, International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society.

[56]  Steven A Greenberg,et al.  How citation distortions create unfounded authority: analysis of a citation network , 2009, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[57]  Roger D Peng,et al.  Reproducible research and Biostatistics. , 2009, Biostatistics.

[58]  R. Jagsi,et al.  Frequency, nature, effects, and correlates of conflicts of interest in published clinical cancer research , 2009, Cancer.

[59]  F. Collins,et al.  Potential etiologic and functional implications of genome-wide association loci for human diseases and traits , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[60]  L. Hothorn.  Statistical issues in drug development (2nd edn). Stephen Senn, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester, 2007. No. of pages: xix + 498. Price: $130.00. ISBN 978‐0‐470‐01877‐4 , 2009 .

[61]  M. Bracken.  Why are so many epidemiology associations inflated or wrong? Does poorly conducted animal research suggest implausible hypotheses? , 2009, Annals of epidemiology.

[62]  C. Ball,et al.  Repeatability of published microarray gene expression analyses , 2009, Nature Genetics.

[63]  Arian Maleki,et al.  Reproducible Research in Computational Harmonic Analysis , 2009, Computing in Science & Engineering.

[64]  J. Ioannidis.  Why Most Discovered True Associations Are Inflated , 2008, Epidemiology.

[65]  S. Evans,et al.  Selective reporting in clinical trials: analysis of trial protocols accepted by The Lancet , 2008, The Lancet.

[66]  John P A Ioannidis,et al.  Perfect study, poor evidence: interpretation of biases preceding study design. , 2008, Seminars in hematology.

[67]  Gordon H Guyatt,et al.  Patient-important outcomes in registered diabetes trials. , 2008, JAMA.

[68]  Sander Greenland,et al.  Multiple comparisons and association selection in general epidemiology. , 2008, International journal of epidemiology.

[69]  G. Guyatt,et al.  GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations , 2008, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[70]  John Ioannidis,et al.  Exploring the Geometry of Treatment Networks , 2008, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[71]  Siobhan M. Dolan,et al.  Assessment of cumulative evidence on genetic associations: interim guidelines. , 2008, International journal of epidemiology.

[72]  P. Santaguida,et al.  Current Pharmacologic Treatment of Dementia: A Clinical Practice Guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians , 2008 .

[73]  Muin J. Khoury,et al.  Quantifying realistic sample size requirements for human genome epidemiology , 2008 .

[74]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Persistence of contradicted claims in the literature. , 2007, JAMA.

[75]  Veronica Yank,et al.  Financial ties and concordance between results and conclusions in meta-analyses: retrospective cohort study , 2007, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[76]  R. Riechelmann,et al.  Disclosure of conflicts of interest by authors of clinical trials and editorials in oncology. , 2007, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[77]  Sander Greenland,et al.  Commentary: on 'quality in epidemiological research: should we be submitting papers before we have the results and submitting more hypothesis generating research?'. , 2007, International journal of epidemiology.

[78]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Patient-important outcomes in diabetes—time for consensus , 2007, The Lancet.

[79]  Gordon H Guyatt,et al.  Problems with use of composite end points in cardiovascular trials: systematic review of randomised controlled trials , 2007, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[80]  S. Goodman,et al.  Reproducible Research: Moving toward Research the Public Can Really Trust , 2007, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[81]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  The Emergence of Networks in Human Genome Epidemiology: Challenges and Opportunities , 2007, Epidemiology.

[82]  Daniel J. Solove.  The Future of Reputation: Gossip, Rumor, and Privacy on the Internet , 2007 .

[83]  Peter C Gøtzsche,et al.  Cochrane reviews compared with industry supported meta-analyses and other meta-analyses of the same drugs: systematic review , 2006, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[84]  Johannes B Reitsma,et al.  Evidence of bias and variation in diagnostic accuracy studies , 2006, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[85]  R. Matthews,et al.  What are the implications of optimism bias in clinical research? , 2006, The Lancet.

[86]  K. Pile,et al.  The prevalence of underpowered randomized clinical trials in rheumatology. , 2005, The Journal of rheumatology.

[87]  Jeffrey S. Morris,et al.  The importance of experimental design in proteomic mass spectrometry experiments: some cautionary tales. , 2005, Briefings in functional genomics & proteomics.

[88]  S. Maxwell.  The persistence of underpowered studies in psychological research: causes, consequences, and remedies. , 2004, Psychological methods.

[89]  E. García‐Berthou,et al.  Incongruence between test statistics and P values in medical papers , 2004 .

[90]  Søren Feodor Nielsen,et al.  1. Statistical Analysis with Missing Data (2nd edn). Roderick J. Little and Donald B. Rubin, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2002. No. of pages: xv+381. ISBN: 0‐471‐18386‐5 , 2004 .

[91]  J. Karlawish,et al.  The continuing unethical conduct of underpowered clinical trials. , 2002, JAMA.

[92]  D. Altman.  Poor-quality medical research: what can journals do? , 2002, JAMA.

[93]  Jason E. Stewart,et al.  Minimum information about a microarray experiment (MIAME)—toward standards for microarray data , 2001, Nature Genetics.

[94]  D. McNamee.  Review of clinical protocols at The Lancet , 2001, The Lancet.

[95]  J. Robins,et al.  Adjusting for Nonignorable Drop-Out Using Semiparametric Nonresponse Models , 1999 .

[96]  P. Bossuyt,et al.  Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. , 1999, JAMA.

[97]  D J Torgerson,et al.  Pragmatic trials: lab meets bedside , 2019, The British journal of dermatology.

[98]  Stephen Senn,et al.  Statistical Issues in Drug Development , 1997 .

[99]  D. Warner,et al.  Statistical power, sample size, and their reporting in randomized controlled trials , 1995 .

[100]  D G Altman,et al.  The scandal of poor medical research , 1994, BMJ.

[101]  A Hartz,et al.  The inexact use of Fisher's Exact Test in six major medical journals. , 1989, JAMA.

[102]  D. Rubin,et al.  Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. , 1989 .

[103]  P. Gøtzsche.  Reference bias in reports of drug trials. , 1987, British medical journal.

[104]  Sander Greenland,et al.  Modern Epidemiology 3rd edition , 1986 .