BioMed Central Blog
PRISMA statement published - and endorsed by BioMed Central's journals
A new reporting guideline for systematic reviews and meta-analyses - the study design considered to produce the highest level of evidence for clinical decision-makers - has been published, and is endorsed in BioMed Central's instructions to authors.
The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement is a revised an updated version of the QUOROM Statement (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses), which was published in 1999 to address deficiencies in the reporting of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials.
Although since publication of QUOROM there have been improvements in the reporting of systematic reviews, the PRISMA Group say that overall quality is still suboptimal. The PRISMA statement, co-published in 5 medical journals, has been updated to address this along with "several conceptual and practical advances in the science of systematic reviews." This includes more explicitly addressing the importance of reporting biases, such as publication bias, in reports of systematic reviews.
BioMed Central supports initiatives aimed at increasing the quality and transparency of research reporting and endorses such groups as CONSORT, QUOROM, and more recently umbrella organisations for reporting guidelines such as EQUATOR and MIBBI. All our relevant journals' instructions to authors and peer review guidelines have therefore been updated to reflect the evolution of QUOROM to PRISMA.
"Systematic reviews supports initiatives aimed at improving the reporting of biomedical research. Checklists have been developed for a number of study designs, including randomized controlled trials (CONSORT), systematic reviews (PRISMA), meta-analyses of observational studies (MOOSE), diagnostic accuracy studies (STARD) and qualitative studies (RATS). We recommend authors refer to the EQUATOR network website for further information on the available reporting guidelines for health research, and the MIBBI Portal for prescriptive checklists for reporting biological and biomedical research where applicable. Authors are requested to make use of these when drafting their manuscript and peer reviewers will also be asked to refer to these checklists when evaluating these studies."
This editorial policy applies to:
Independent journals, including Trials:
BMC Series journals, such as BMC Medicine
Special medical journals, such as Arthritis Research & Therapy
Posted by Iain Hrynaszkiewicz at 15:05 Comments (0)
Study finds clinical trial registrations often fail to meet WHO data standards
The WHO minimum dataset has improved trial registry compliance but many individual trial records recorded between April 2005 and February 2007 still omit key information, including researcher contact details, a study published this week in Trials has found.
The registration of clinical trials in a publicly accessible database has become an established part of the research process for healthcare interventions, and is also increasingly accepted on ethical and moral grounds. The most recent revision to the Declaration of Helsinki – in October 2008 – included a requirement for prospective trial registration.
Since 2005 the ICMJE has required that trials be registered in compliance with the 20-item WHO minimum dataset – “The minimum amount of trial information that must appear in a register in order for a given trial to be considered fully registered.”
Moja et al. performed a retrospective analysis of 21 online clinical trial registries from April 2005 to February 2007 for compliance with the WHO minimum dataset. They found that, among the 11 registries that provided guidelines for registration, the median compliance with the WHO criteria were 14 out of 20 items (range 6 to 20).
Methodology
Compliance of clinical trial registries with the World Health Organization minimum data set: a survey
Lorenzo
P Moja, Ivan Moschetti, Munira Nurbhai, Anna Compagnoni, Alessandro
Liberati, Jeremy M Grimshaw, An-Wen Chan, Kay Dickersin, Karmela
Krleza-Jeric, David Moher, Ida Sim, Jimmy Volmink
Trials 2009, 10:56 (22 July 2009)
Slightly more than half of trial records completed the contact details criteria, and none of the local registry websites studied published guidelines on the trial data items required for registration.
As such the authors call for peer reviewers and journal editors to scrutinise trial registration records to ensure consistency with WHO’s core content requirements when considering trial-related publications.
During the course of the study, 2 international registries (including ISRCTN – administered by BioMed Central’s sister company, Current Controlled Trials) and 1 national registry modified their submission fields to become fully compliant with WHO standards. At the end of the data collection period, February 2007, ISRCTN was among the registries that enabled full 20-item compliance.
Posted by Iain Hrynaszkiewicz at 16:18 Comments (0)
Alzheimer’s researchers call for increased UK funding in dementia
Leading Alzheimer’s experts have called upon the UK Government in an open letter to end underfunding in dementia research, and triple it to £96 million within 5 years. Signatories include John Hardy and Nick Fox from the Editorial Board of Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy, a journal recently launched by BioMed Central.
The letter says: "Within a generation, 1.4 million people in the UK will live with dementia, costing our economy £50 billion per year. Yet for every pound spent on dementia care, a fraction of a penny is spent on research into defeating the condition. Our key weakness is lack of funding, not lack of talent.” This letter coincides with a London summit bringing together scientists, doctors, carers and people with dementia.
At this pivotal time in dementia research, our new journal aims to become the major forum for translational research into Alzheimer’s disease. It will publish open access research articles, allowing immediate access both to the scientists working in this area, and the increasing number of patients it effects.
For more details about the journal, please visit the journal information page or contact the editorial office. To keep up to date with the latest developments, news and articles being published in this exciting new journal, please register to receive regular alerts.
Frances Mulvany
In-house Editor - Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
Posted by Iain Hrynaszkiewicz at 12:29 Comments (0)
“Genomic advances and their impact on clinical trial design”, a Commentary published this week in Genome Medicine, discusses the effect current advances in genomic research have on the future of clinical trial design and on the interpretation of clinical trial data for disease management.
In their article, Dr Sumithra J Mandrekar and Dr Daniel J Sargent highlight milestones in genomic advances, such as the ability to develop genomic signatures for risk stratification of patients with various diseases and the development of biomarkers indicating how a particular patient might respond to treatment.
Although these advances have been hugely beneficial to medical research, their increased validity has given cause for a whole new way of designing clinical trials in future. For example, past clinical trials aiming to identify diagnostic markers of disease would select participants with certain risk factors for a particular disease and compare their diagnosis to a control group; the identification of genomic signatures, however, would significantly change the identity of risk factors in this trial methodology.
As is highlighted in this Commentary, we are entering an era of personalized medicine, and advances in genome medicine have provided researchers with a whole new set of tools for studying patient response to treatment; how these tools will best be incorporated into future trial design, however, remains to be seen.
Genome Medicine, BioMed Central’s premier medical journal, stands at the forefront of research and clinical practice in the post-genomic era. The journal is led by six Section Editors and is supported by a world renowned Editorial Board.
We welcome cutting-edge genomic and post-genomic research reporting findings that significantly advance our understanding and management of human health and disease.
Keep abreast of recent developments in these exciting times: register for article updates and submit your next manuscript of outstanding research to Genome Medicine.
Jasmine Farsarakis
Commissioning/Development Editor, Genome Medicine
Posted by Jasmine Farsarakis at 17:01 Comments (1)
So far we have reached 20% of our target for Computer Aid International's Kenyatta University Programme. BioMed Central's employees have been busy fundraising through monthly coffee mornings, skydiving, a pub quiz and a live music gig.
Our four editorial members, Ruth, Joe, Helen and Matt (pictured) continue to train in preparation for their cycle around Chile in September to promote the charity and raise more money for our project. Recently they held a Chilean wine-tasting evening where we sampled many of Chile's best wines and learnt a lot about the country's famous wine regions.
You can help us raise our target of £10,000 by making a donation via our fundraising page at http://www.justgiving.com/biomedcentral/. By contributing to this cause you will be helping to improve education and access to valuable research in one of the poorest parts of Africa.
Also, if you're in the UK and have some old PCs lying around at home, why not consider donating them to Computer Aid? The charity aims to send out an average of 2,300 PCs per month so to achieve this target they need approximately 2,800 PCs incoming each month. If you think you can help, please visit Computer Aid International.
Posted by Charlotte Webber at 14:20 Comments (0)
3 more journals indexed in MEDLINE
After review by the Literature Selection Technical Review Committee, the following three journals have been accepted for inclusion in MEDLINE, the National Library of Medicine's premier bibliographic database:
Inclusion of these journals in MEDLINE is a strong endorsement of the journal’s growing reputations in their fields, and we would like to congratulate the Editorial Teams of each of these journals. For BMC Medical Genomics this achievement comes on the back of the news that the journal has recently published its 100th article.
All BioMed Central journals are indexed/included in PubMed, PubMed Central, Scirus, Google Scholar, Citebase, OAIster and Scopus, with growing numbers of journals in Thomson Reuters, Medline, CABI and a number of other relevant bibliographic services.Posted by Charlotte Hubbard at 13:40 Comments (0)
Many learned societies are considering the publishing strategies for
their journals in the face of the squeeze on library subscriptions.
Open access is an increasingly attractive option for many societies,
providing a sustainable financial model for their journal, while
helping to maximize the visibility of research in the field they
support. BioMed Central currently has publishing partnerships with more
than 30 societies which either started new open access journals or
converted their previously subscription-based journals.
To
ensure that societies have the facts to hand when making their
decisions, BioMed Central recently hosted a workshop for a group of
consultants who advise societies. The presentations from the day are
now available, covering the history and current workings of open access
at BioMed Central, with a focus on how we work with societies and the
scenarios in which an open access business model is working well.
We plan to repeat this workshop in various formats over the coming months, so please do contact us if you are interested in attending, or pass on the details to those who might be interested.
Sarah Cooney, Director of Journal and Portfolio Development
Deborah Kahn, Publishing Director
Posted by Stefan Busch at 16:31 Comments (1)
Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy publishes first articles
Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy, a new BioMed Central journal edited by Douglas Galasko, Todd Golde and Gordon Wilcock has just published its first articles online.
The Editors-in-Chief introduce the journal in their editorial and to celebrate its launch, we will be distributing a special print preview issue at the Alzheimer's Association 2009 International Conference on Alzheimer’s Disease (ICAD, booth 119; Vienna, 12th – 15th July). Please come along and pick up a free copy if you are attending this meeting.
The journal aims to be the major forum for translational research into Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and will publish open access research articles of exceptional interest. Review articles and expert commentary will accompany key papers.
Our first articles include a commentary from Paul Aisen discussing how to move forwards after recent disappointing negative trial results in Alzheimer’s drug development. Patrick Kehoe proposes angiotensins and associated enzymatic pathways as important mediators of recognised but undefined links between blood pressure and AD in a review article. And Blossom Stephan et al. review the concept of ‘vascular cognitive impairment, no dementia’ (VCIND) and its application for screening individuals at increased risk of dementia secondary to vascular disease and its risk factors.
Visit the journal website to read the first articles published and to submit your next piece of research. More content will be published in the first issue of the journal in the coming weeks. All articles are currently free to access.
For more details about the journal, please visit the journal information page or contact the editorial office. To keep up to date with the latest developments, news and articles being published in this exciting new journal, please register to receive regular alerts.
Frances Mulvany
In-house Editor - Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
Posted by Iain Hrynaszkiewicz at 11:42 Comments (0)
New print design for Arthritis Research & Therapy
Arthritis Research & Therapy is unveiling a new look in the latest print edition of the journal. This bi-monthly issue - now in its 11th volume - presents a compendium of content found on the journal website, where articles are continuously published.
The June print issue introduces a colourful new front cover design, and an Editors’ Choice page that highlights articles of special interest as selected by the Editors-in-Chief. Subscribers will also receive a bumper edition of the journal containing six authoritative review articles on topics such as spondylarthritis, gout and systemic lupus erythematosus.
Arthritis Research & Therapy is an international, peer-reviewed journal with a focus in mechanisms of, and translational laboratory and clinical research into localised and systemic immune-inflammatory and degenerative diseases of the musculoskeletal system. The journal is edited by Professor Peter Lipsky and Professor Sir Ravinder N Maini with the support of an international Editorial Board.
All research articles published in Arthritis Research & Therapy are open access. Subscribers have unrestricted access to all commentaries and reviews, although all letters and editorials are freely available. A free 30-day online trial subscription is available via the website.
In 2008-9 the journal is marking 10 years of publication with its 10th anniversary issue - a collection of 39 reviews by renowned experts, providing both
researchers and clinicians with a comprehensive understanding of
current knowledge on the scientific basis of rheumatology, which is freely available online.
The journal also received a new, increased Impact Factor in June of 4.49, placing it amongst the top-ranked journals in rheumatology. Moreover, the broader and more informative 5-year Impact Factor places Arthritis Research & Therapy fourth in the field (4.64).
Abigail Jones
Senior Assistant Editor - Arthritis Research & Therapy
Posted by Iain Hrynaszkiewicz at 16:39 Comments (0)
David Baulcombe honoured in this year's Queen's Birthday Honours List
Professor David Baulcombe, co-Editor-in-Chief of Silence,
has been awarded a Knighthood for his services to plant science. David is
Professor of Botany and Royal Society Research Professor at Cambridge
University. His research interests include RNA silencing and protein-based
innate immunity mechanisms in plants against pests and disease.
Silence,
a new open access journal soon to be launched by BioMed Central, covers all
aspects of genetic and epigenetic control that is mediated by RNA. David, and
his 
co-Editor-in-Chief Phillip Zamore (Gretchen Stone Cook
Professor of Biomedical Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School,
USA), are supported by an expert Editorial Board. For
more information about Silence please visit the journal website, where you can also sign up
for regular updates keeping you abreast of any developments, or alternatively
contact the editorial
office.
Posted by Andrea Melendez at 17:53 Comments (0)
Genes as building blocks of disease susceptibility
“Exploring the unknown: assumptions about allelic architecture and strategies for susceptibility variant discovery”, a Minireview published this week in Genome Medicine, highlights the significant progress in identifying the genomic mechanisms behind disease predisposition.
In his article, Prof Mark I McCarthy explains that, although the discovery of specific genes associated with many common diseases is interesting, there are still many unanswered questions regarding the best way to identify predisposition to disease.
Genome-wide association studies help to identify a small proportion of common variants associated with a specific disease. Prof McCarthy highlights the importance of understanding the effect of allelic architecture within the identified genes, and discusses how future research prospects of combining data from common-variant associations with structural genetic variance might be more effective in shedding light on the mechanisms of disease susceptibility.
The key to future research on disease susceptibility, says Prof McCarthy, involves ‘open minds, a healthy disdain for orthodoxy, and careful exploration of the technological and methodological options’.
Genome Medicine, BioMed Central’s premier medical journal, stands at the forefront of research and clinical practice in the post-genomic era. The journal is led by six Section Editors and is supported by a world renowned Editorial Board.
We welcome cutting-edge genomic and post-genomic research reporting findings that significantly advance our understanding and management of human health and disease.
Keep abreast of recent developments in these exciting times: register for article updates and submit your next manuscript of outstanding research to Genome Medicine.
Jasmine Farsarakis, Commissioning/Development Editor, Genome Medicine
Posted by Jasmine Farsarakis at 13:04 Comments (0)
Viewpoints: contrasting opinions in Neural Development
Neural Development has published the first articles of a new review series, in which leading researchers present apparently conflicting interpretations in parallel.
The series will focus on the mechanisms of neural development for which large data sets are available, but no consensus interpretation has emerged. By inviting the leading proponents of distinct viewpoints to present their hypotheses side-by-side, Neural Development hopes to focus and stimulate debate on the central issues involved.
The series begins with a pair of articles by Marla Feller and Leo Chalupa. They examine the idea that patterns of spontaneous electrical activity in retinal cells provide instructions required for specific connectivity of retinal axons with their targets in the lateral geniculate nucleus. The topic is an important one because this system has been an influential model for analysis of activity-dependent refinement of connectivity, a phenomenon that appears to be widespread in the developing brain.
Readers of Neural Development are invited to add to the debate by using the ‘post a comment’ feature available on the full text version of each article.
For more information please read the Editorial introducing the series. Suggestions of further topics to cover are welcome - please send suggestions to editorial@neuraldevelopment.com.Posted by Ciaran O'Neill at 18:20 Comments (0)
Bioinformaticians show off their Sudoku skills at ISMB
Last week BioMed Central exhibited at the 17th International Conference on Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology (ISMB) & 8th European Conference on Computational Biology (ECCB) in Stockholm, where 1,400 delegates descended upon Stockholm International Fairs.
ISMB/ECCB is a great opportunity for us to meet with researchers who have published in our bioinformatics journals, such as BMC Bioinformatics and BMC Systems Biology. Many delegates were excited to see our new Impact Factor of 3.71 for BMC Systems Biology and the imminent launch of our latest independent journal, Journal of Biomedical Semantics.
Perhaps the biggest highlight of our time at the conference was the Sudoku challenge on Thursday morning where delegates raced each other to finish a Sudoku puzzle in the fastest time to win a Nintendo DS. For the three days leading up to the event various delegates had guaranteed that they had what it takes to win the prize but there could only be one winner. Crowds started to gather as early as 9.30am with competitors keen to locate the best possible spot to take the challenge. By 10am a 30-strong crowd took over the BioMed Central stand all eager to win the Nintendo DS though it is fair to say that some participants (possibly students) were more interested in receiving free notepads.
10.15am and the race was underway, the atmosphere was tense and the exhibition hall deadly quiet. Five minutes into the competition and the participants were still madly scribbling away, others looking lost in thought. Two minutes later a challenger stepped forward, looking confident and relaxed, could this be our Sudoku champion? A thorough examination of his completed puzzle confirmed he was indeed the winner, finishing in seven minutes exactly. Congratulations go to Arthur Hsu (pictured) from WEHI Bioinformatics in Australia for his seriously impressive Sudoku skills.
So that concludes our time at ISMB/ECCB, it was great meeting so many of you and we look forward to seeing you again at future conferences.
Posted by Charlotte Webber at 11:37 Comments (0)
Authenticity of some published trials in question
More than 90% of a sample of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in Chinese journals between 1994 and 2005 did not adhere to recognised methodology for randomisation, according to a study published yesterday in Trials, casting doubt on the reliability of research that has the potential to influence medical decision-makers.
Wu and colleagues (Chinese Cochrane Centre at Sichuan University, China and Ottawa Hospital Research Institute) searched the China National Knowledge Infrastructure electronic database for reports published in the Chinese literature between January 1994 and June 2005, that were described by the authors as RCTs or claimed to have used random sequence generation or allocation concealment.
Telephone interviews with the first or co-authors of 2235 reports about randomisation methods and quality-control features of the trial indicated that only 6.8% of the studies be considered “authentic” RCTs. Although only 51.6% of trials supported by government or other official organizations were found to be authentic, all trials of pre-market drugs were identified as such. Wu et al. report that of the first-authors erroneously identifying their studies as RCTs, 85.6% did not fully understand the principles of randomisation, whilst 5.1% mislabelled their trials despite an understanding of the relevant methodology.
Methodology
Randomized trials published in some Chinese journals: how many are randomized?
Taixiang Wu, Youping Li, Zhaoxiang Bian, Guanjian Liu, David Moher
Trials 2009, 10:46 (2 July 2009)
[Abstract] [Provisional PDF]
The misleading reporting of RCTs is likely a worldwide problem, but the investigators suggest a link between their results and the high proportion of positive trial results published in Chinese journals, noting that inadequate randomisation has been previously shown to result in more favourable estimates of treatment effects. They also highlight the potential for falsely reported RCTs to mislead healthcare providers and policy makers, and impact upon the findings of systematic reviews.
Wu et al. advocate improvements to the education of researchers in the principles of randomisation methodology and scientific reporting. In addition, they suggest that the development of peer review guidelines is needed to help identify poorly randomised studies before publication.
Victoria Thompson
Assistant Journal Development Editor - Trials
Posted by Iain Hrynaszkiewicz at 17:16 Comments (0)
Reporting of treatment heterogeneity proves challenging
A review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that had been published in five prominent medical journals has revealed that heterogeneity of treatment effects (HTE) is frequently ignored or incorrectly analysed. The results of this study were published last week in Trials.
Some patients will experience more or less benefit from treatment than the averages reported from clinical trials; the magnitude of such variation in therapeutic outcome across a population is termed HTE. Highly variable treatment response rates are known to exist for many common conditions, including ischemic stroke and diabetes. Identifying HTE is therefore necessary to individualise treatment.
Gabler et al., conducted a review of the prevalence of HTE analyses in 319 RCTs published in Annals of Internal Medicine, BMJ, Journal of the American Medical Association, The Lancet, and New England Journal of Medicine. They found that just 29% of studies reported HTE analysis and were only marginally better in 2004 than in 1994. Another 28% reported subgroup-only analyses, without the formal statistical tests of heterogeneity that are recommended by the CONSORT guidelines.
The authors conclude that HTE reporting in the general medical literature is neither rigorous nor routine and suggest it may be time to develop new standards for reporting.
Dealing with heterogeneity of treatment effects: is the literature up to the challenge?
Nicole B Gabler, Naihua Duan, Diana Liao, Joann G Elmore, Theodore G Ganiats, Richard L Kravitz
These results follow those of a another study published last year in Trials, which revealed that only 31% of RCTs published in the same leading medical journals reliably accounted for missing data when analysing quality of life outcomes.
In addition to original research relating to RCTs, Trials also encourages the publication of study protocols, recognizing that this reduces risk of non-publication of trial results and facilitates methodological discussion. Such published study protocols, while important to the scientific record, are unlikely to be heavily cited. It is therefore all the more impressive that Trials has increased its Impact Factor in the latest 2008 Journal Citation Reports to 1.74 (up from 1.44 last year). For the first time the journal is ranked above competitors such as the official journal of the Society for Clinical Trials, Clinical Trials (2008 Impact Factor 1.69) and the Elsevier title Contemporary Clinical Trials (2008 Impact Factor 1.42).
For more information about the journal Trials, please contact the editorial office.
Abigail Jones
Senior Assistant Editor – Trials
Posted by Iain Hrynaszkiewicz at 17:15 Comments (0)