‘Lies, damned lies, and statistics’: pharmaceutical, device, and academic enterprises ‘in the dock’

1. Freedman DH. Lies, Damned Lies, and Medical Science. The Atlantic [Internet]. November 2010 [cited 2011 Jan 25]. Available from: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/11/lies-damned-lies-andmedical-science/8269/Search in Google Scholar

2. Lehrer J. The Truth Wears Off. Is there something wrong with the scientific method? The New Yorker [Internet]. 2010 Dec 13 [cited 2011 Jan 25]; Available from: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/12/13/101213fa_fact_lehrerSearch in Google Scholar

3. Ioannidis JPA. Why most published research findings are false [Internet]. 2005 [cited 2011 Jan 25]; 2(8):124. Available from: http://www.plosmedicine.org10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124118232716060722Search in Google Scholar

4. Ioannidis JPA. Contradicted and initially stronger effects in highly cited clinical research. JAMA. 2005; 294(2):218-28.10.1001/jama.294.2.21816014596Search in Google Scholar

5. Editorial. Anticancer vitamins du Jour-The ABCED’s so far. Am J. Epidemiol. 2010; 172:1-3.10.1093/aje/kwq112289253520562190Search in Google Scholar

6. Stolzenberg-Solomon RZ, Jacobs EJ, Arsian AA, Qi D, Patel AV, Helzisouer KJ, et al. Circulating 25- hydroxyvitamin D and risk of pancreatic cancer. Am J. Epidemiol. 2010; 172:81-93.Search in Google Scholar

7. Campbell CC. Malaria Control-Addressing challenges to ambitious goals. NEJM. 2009; 361(5):522-3.10.1056/NEJMe090515919641210Search in Google Scholar

8. World Health Organization. Global plan for artemisinin resistance containment [Internet]. 2011. [cited 2011 Jan 30]. Available from: http://www.who.int/malaria/publications/atozartemisinin_resistance_containment_2011.pdf)Search in Google Scholar

9. Andersson DI, and Hughes D. Antibiotic resistance and its cost: is it possible to reverse resistance? [Internet] 2011. [cited 2011 Jan 29]. Available from: http://www.nature.com/nrmicro/journal/v8/n4/abs/nrmicro2319.html10.1038/nrmicro231920208551Search in Google Scholar

10. Lundh A, Barbateskovic M, Hrobjartsson A, Gotzsche PC. Conflicts of interest at medical journals; the influence of industry-supported randomized trials on journal impact factors and revenues - cohort study [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2011 Jan 26]; 7 (10): e1000354. Available from: http://www.plosmedicine.org10.1371/journal.pmed.1000354296433621048986Search in Google Scholar

11. Fleming TR. Addressing missing data in clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 2011; 154:113-7.10.7326/0003-4819-154-2-201101180-00010331976121242367Search in Google Scholar

12. Smyth RMD, Kirkham JJ, Jacoby A, Altman DG, Gamble C, Williamson PR. Frequency and reasons for outcome reporting bias in clinical trials: interviews with trialists. BMJ. 2010; 341:c7153.10.1136/bmj.c7153301681621212122Search in Google Scholar

13. Chan AW. Bias, spin, and misreporting: time for full access to trial protocols and results [Internet]. 2008 [cited 2011 Jan 25]; 5 (11): 230. Available from: http://www.plosmedicine.org10.1371/journal.pmed.0050230258635919067481Search in Google Scholar

14. Pfeiffer T, Rand DG, Dreber A. Decision-making in research tasks with sequential testing [Internet]. 2009 [cited 2011 Jan 25]; 4 (2): 4607. Available from: http://www.plosone.org10.1371/journal.pone.0004607264300819240797Search in Google Scholar

15. Sinha IP, Smyth RL, Williamson PR. Using the Delphi technique to determine which outcomes to measure in clinical trials: recommendations for the future based on a systematic review of existing studies [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2011 Jan 26]. Available from: http://www.plosmedicine.org10.1371/journal.pmed.1000393302669121283604Search in Google Scholar

16. Shrier I, Boivin JF, Platt RW, Steele RJ, Brophy JM, Carnevale F, et al. The interpretation of systematic reviews with meta-analyses: an objective or subjective process? [Internet]. BMC medical informatics and decision making. 2008 [cited 2011 Jan 28]; 8(19). Available from: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6947-8-1910.1186/1472-6947-8-19240856718495019Search in Google Scholar

17. Rising K, Bacchetti P, Bero L. Reporting bias in drug trials submitted to the Food and Drug Administration: review of publication and presentation [Internet]. 2008 [cited 2011 Jan 28]; 5 (11):e217. Available from: http://www.plosmedicine.org10.1371/journal.pmed.0050217258635019067477Search in Google Scholar

18. Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia. [Internet]. Randomized Controlled Trial. [updated 2011 Jan 25; cited 2011 Jan 31]. Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomized_controlled_trialSearch in Google Scholar

19. Pocock SJ, Travison TG, Wruck LM. Figures in clinical trial reports: current practice and scope for improvement [Internet]. 2011. [cited 2011 Jan 26]. Available from: www.trialsjournal.com/content/8/1/3610.1186/1745-6215-8-36222222118021449Search in Google Scholar

20. Salanti G, Ades AE, Ioannidis JPA. Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64:163-71.10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.03.01620688472Search in Google Scholar

21. Glickman SW, McHutchison JG, Petersen ED, Cairns CB, Harrington RA, Califf RM, Schulman KA. Ethical and scientific implications of the globalization of clinical research. NEJM. 2009; 360(8):816-23.10.1056/NEJMsb080392919228627Search in Google Scholar

22. Journal of Negative Results in Biomedicine. [cited 2011 Jan 28]. Available from: http://www.jnrbm.comSearch in Google Scholar

23. Godlee F, Smith J, Marcovitch H. Wakefield’s article linking MMR vaccine and autism was fraudulent. [cited 2011 Jan 15]. Available from: http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c7452.full.10.1136/bmj.c745221209060Search in Google Scholar

24. Deer B. How the case against the MMR vaccine was fixed. [cited 2011 Jan 15]. Available from: http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c534710.1136/bmj.c534721209059Search in Google Scholar