Chan A.-W., Hróbjartsson A., Haahr M. T. et al. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles // JAMA. 2004. May 26. Vol. 291. № 20. P. 2457–2465.
Lee K. L., McNeer J. F., Starmer C. F., Harris P. J., Rosati R. A. Clinical judgment and statistics. Lessons from a simulated randomized trial in coronary artery disease // Circulation. 1980. March. Vol. 61. № 3. P. 508–515.
Rothwell P. M. Treating individuals 2. Subgroup analysis in randomised controlled trials: importance, indications, and interpretation // Lancet. 2005. January. Vol. 365. P. 176–186.
Stallones R. A. The use and abuse of subgroup analysis in epidemiological research // Preventive medicine. 1987. March. Vol. 16. № 2. P. 183–194.
Oxman A. D., Guyatt G. H. A Consumer’s guide to subgroup analyses // Annals of internal medicine. 1992. January. Vol. 116. № 1. P. 78–84.
Sterne J. A. C., Smith G. D. Sifting the evidence – what’s wrong with significance tests? // Physical Therapy. 2001. August 1. Vol. 81. № 8. P. 1464–1469.
Guyatt G., Jaeschke R., Heddle N., Cook D., Shannon H., Walter S. Basic statistics for clinicians: 2. Interpreting study results: confidence intervals // Canadian Medical Association journal. 1995. January. Vol. 152. № 2. P. 169–173.
Kääriäinen I., Sipponen P., Siurala M. What fraction of hospital ulcer patients is eligible for prospective drug trials? // Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology. 1991. Vol. 26. № 186. P. 73–76.
Charlson M. E., Horwitz R. I. Applying results of randomised trials to clinical practice: impact of losses before randomisation // British medical journal. 1984. November 10. Vol. 289. P. 1281–1284.
Simpson S. H., Eurich D. T., Majumdar S. R., Padwal R. S., Tsuyuki R. T. et al. A meta-analysis of the association between adherence to drug therapy and mortality // BMJ. 2006. July 1. Vol. 333. № 7557.
Mitchell J. “But will it help my patients with myocardial infarction?” The implications of recent trials for everyday country folk // British Medical Journal. 1982. October 23. Vol. 285. P. 1140–1148.
Shepherd J. Statins for primary prevention: strategic options to save lives and money // Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 2004. February. Vol. 97. № 2. P. 66–71.
Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study Group. Carotid endarterectomy for patients with asymptomatic internal carotid artery stenosis // JAMA. 1995. Vol. 273. P. 1421–1428.
Moore W. S., Young B., Baker W. H. et al. Surgical results: a justification of the surgeon selection process for the ACAS trial // Journal of Vascular Surgery. 1996. Vol. 23. P. 323–328.
Bond R., Rerkasem K., Rothwell P. M. High morbidity due to endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid stenosis // Cerebrovascular diseases. 2003. Vol. 16.
Vesper I. Europe’s academics fail to report results for 90% of clinical trials // Nature. 2018. September 13.
Plint A. C., Moher D., Morrison A., Schulz K., Altman D. G., Hill C., Gaboury I. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review // The Medical journal of Australia. 2006. September. Vol. 185. № 5. P. 263–267.
Rothstein H. R., Sutton A. J., Borenstein M. (eds). Publication Bias in Meta-analysis.
West Sussex, England: Wiley, 2005.
Tong C. H., Tong L.-I., Tong J. E. The Vioxx recall case and comments // Competitiveness Review. Vol. 19. № 2. P. 114–118.
Psaty B. M., Kronmal R. A. Reporting mortality findings in trials of rofecoxib for Alzheimer disease or cognitive impairment: a case study based on documents from rofecoxib litigation // JAMA. 2008. Vol. 299. № 15. P. 1813–1817.
Topol E. J. Failing the public health – rofecoxib, Merck, and the FDA // The New England journal of Medicine. 2004. October 21. Vol. 351. P. 1707–1709.
Berenson A. Evidence in Vioxx suits shows intervention by Merck officials // The New York Times. 2005. April 24.
Curfman G. D., Morrissey S., Drazen J. M. Expression of concern: Bombardier et al., “Comparison of upper gastrointestinal toxicity of rofecoxib and naproxen in patients with rheumatoid arthritis” // New England Journal of Medicine. 2000. Vol. 343. P. 1520–1528.
Egilman D. S., Presler A. H. Report of specific cardiovascular outcomes of the ADVANTAGE trial // Annals of internal medicine. 2006. May 16. Vol. 144. № 10. P. 781.
Nelson L. D. False-positives, p-hacking, statistical power, and evidential value. University of California, Berkeley, Haas School of Business, Summer Institute. 2014.
Dickersin K. How important is publication bias? A synthesis of available data // AIDS education and prevention. 1997. Vol. 9. P. 15–21.
Turner E. H., Matthews A. M., Linardatos E., Tell R. A., Rosenthal R. Selective publication of antidepressant. Trials and its influence on apparent efficacy // New England Journal of Medicine. 2008. Vol. 358. № 3. P. 252–260.
Rising K., Bacchetti P., Bero L. Reporting bias in drug trials submitted to the Food and Drug Administration: review of publication and presentation // Plos Medicine. 2008. November 25. Vol. 5. № 11, e217.
Scharf O., Colevas A. D. Adverse event reporting in publications compared with sponsor database for cancer clinical trials // Journal of clinical oncology. 2006. August 20. Vol. 24. № 24. P. 3933–3938.
MacLean C. H., Morton S. C., Ofman J. J., Roth E. A., Shekelle P. G. How useful are unpublished data from the Food and Drug Administration in meta-analysis? // Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2003. Vol. 56. P. 44–51.
Chan A.-W., Krleža-Jerić K., Schmid I., Altman D. G. Outcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research // CMAJ. 2004. September 28. Vol. 171. № 7. P. 735–740.
Dwan K., Altman D. G., Arnaiz J. A., Bloom J., Chan A.-W., Cronin E. et al. Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias // PLOS One. 2008. August 28. Vol. 3. № 8, e3081.
Lee K. P., Boyd E. A., Holroyd-Leduc J. M., Bacchetti P., Bero L. A. Predictors of publication: characteristics of submitted manuscripts associated with acceptance at major biomedical journals // The Medical journal of Australia. 2006. June 19. Vol. 184. № 12. P. 621–626.
Ioannidis J., Lau J. Evolution of treatment effects over time: Empirical insight from recursive cumulative metaanalyses // PNAS. 2001. January 30. Vol. 98. № 3. P. 831–836.
Ross J. S., Mulvey G. K., Hines E. M., Nissen S. E., Krumholz H. M. Trial publication after registration in clinical trials. Gov: a cross-sectional analysis // Plos Medicine. 2009. September 8. Vol. 6. № 9, e1000144.
Drazen J. M., Wood A. J. J. Trial Registration Report Card // The New England journal of medicine. 2005. December 29. Vol. 353. P. 2809–2811.
Ioannidis J. P. A., Trikalinos T. A. Early extreme contradictory estimates may appear in published research: The Proteus phenomenon in molecular genetics researchand randomized trials // Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2005. Vol. 58. P. 543–549.
Ioannidis J. P. Effect of the statistical significance of results on the time to completion and publication of randomized efficacy trials // JAMA. 1998. Vol. 279. № 4. P. 281–286.
Bekelman J. E., Li Y., Gross C. P. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review // JAMA. 2003. January 22–29. Vol. 289. № 4. P. 454–465.
Bhandari M., Busse J. W., Jackowski D., Montori V. M., Schünemann H. et al. Association between industry funding and statistically significant pro-industry findings in medical and surgical randomized trials // CMAJ. 2004. February 17. Vol. 170. № 4. P. 477–480.
Chalmers I. The true lorcainide story revealed // BMJ. 2015. Vol. 350, g7717
Cowley A. J., Skene A., Stainer K., Hampton J. R. The effect of lorcainide on arrhythmias and survival in patients with acute myocardial infarction: an example of publication bias // International journal of cardiology. 1993. July 1. Vol. 40. № 2. P. 161–166.
De Angelis C., Drazen J. M., Frizelle F. A., Haug C., Hoey J., Horton R. et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors // The New England journal of medicine. 2004. September 16. Vol. 351. P. 1250–1251.
Barroso C. Epistemology of medical knowledge / Seising R., Tabacchi M. (eds). Fuzziness and medicine: philosophical reflections and application systems in health care. Studies in fuzziness and soft computing. Vol. 302. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2013.
Eddy D. M. Evidence-based medicine: a unified approach // Health Affairs. 2005. Vol. 24. № 1. P. 9–17.
Claridge J. A., Fabian T. C. History and development of evidence-based medicine // World Journal of Surgery. 2005. Vol. 29. № 5. P. 547–553.
Van Baalen S. The epistemology of clinical decision-making: an epistemological analysis of reasoning in clinical practice, and the role of technological measurements. Master thesis. University of twente, 2014.
Goodman K. W. Ethics and evidence-based medicine. Fallibility and responsibility in clinical science. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Glasziou P., Chalmers I., Rawlings M., McCulloch P. When are randomised trials unnecessary? Picking signal from noise // BMJ. 2007. Vol. 334. № 7589. P. 349–351.
Worrall J. Why There’s no cause to randomize // The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science. 2007. Vol. 58. № 3. P. 451–488.