The effects of industry funding and positive outcomes in the interpretation of clinical trial results: A randomized trial among Dutch psychiatrists

Background: Most studies are inclined to report positive rather than negative or inconclusive results. It is currently unknown how clinicians appraise the results of a randomized clinical trial. For example, how does the study funding source influence the appraisal of an RCT, and do positive findings influence perceived credibility and clinical relevance? This study investigates whether psychiatrists' appraisal of a scientific abstract is influenced by industry funding disclosures and a positive outcome. Methods: Dutch psychiatrists were randomized to evaluate a scientific abstract describing... Mehr ...

Verfasser: Tijdink, Joeri K.
Smulders, Yvo M.
Bouter, Lex M.
Vinkers, Christiaan H.
Dokumenttyp: Artikel
Erscheinungsdatum: 2019
Reihe/Periodikum: Tijdink , J K , Smulders , Y M , Bouter , L M & Vinkers , C H 2019 , ' The effects of industry funding and positive outcomes in the interpretation of clinical trial results: A randomized trial among Dutch psychiatrists ' , BMC Medical Ethics , vol. 20 , no. 1 , 64 . https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-019-0405-7
Sprache: Englisch
Permalink: https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-26687945
Datenquelle: BASE; Originalkatalog
Powered By: BASE
Link(s) : https://research.vumc.nl/en/publications/a68e830a-8bf7-48f4-a17f-416319ce7f57