Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German

Some randomised controlled trials (RCTs) done in German-speaking Europe are published in international English-language journals and others in national German-language journals. We assessed whether authors are more likely to report trials with statistically significant results in English than in Ger...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Lancet (British edition) 1997-08, Vol.350 (9074), p.326-329
Hauptverfasser: Egger, Matthias, Zellweger-Zähner, Tanja, Schneider, Martin, Junker, Christoph, Lengeler, Christian, Antes, Gerd
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Some randomised controlled trials (RCTs) done in German-speaking Europe are published in international English-language journals and others in national German-language journals. We assessed whether authors are more likely to report trials with statistically significant results in English than in German. We studied pairs of RCT reports, matched for first author and time of publication, with one report published in German and the other in English. Pairs were identified from reports fround in a manual search of five leading German-language journals and from reports published by the same authors in English found on Medline. Quality of methods and reporting were assessed with two different scales by two investigators who were unaware of authors' identities, affiliations, and other characteristics of trial reports. Main study endpoints were selected by two investigators who were unaware of trial results. Our main outcome was the number of pairs of studies in which the levels of significance (shown by p values) were discordant. 62 eligible pairs of reports were identified but 19 (31%) were excluded because they were duplicate publications. A further three pairs (5%) were excluded because no p values were given. The remaining 40 pairs were analysed. Design characteristics and quality features were similar for reports in both languages. Only 35% of German-language articles, compared with 62% of English-language articles, reported significant (p
ISSN:0140-6736
1474-547X
DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(97)02419-7