prikaz prve stranice dokumenta Dealing with the positive publication bias: Why you should really publish your negative results
  Download
PDF 755.71 KB
Scientific paper - Review paper
Dealing with the positive publication bias: Why you should really publish your negative results
Biochemia Medica, 27 (2017), 3; 1-6. https://doi.org/10.11613/bm.2017.030201
Mlinarić, Ana; Horvat, Martina; Šupak Smolčić, Vesna

Cite this document

Mlinarić, A., Horvat, M. & Šupak Smolčić, V. (2017). Dealing with the positive publication bias: Why you should really publish your negative results. Biochemia Medica, 27. (3), 1-6. doi: 10.11613/bm.2017.030201

Mlinarić, Ana, et al. "Dealing with the positive publication bias: Why you should really publish your negative results." Biochemia Medica, vol. 27, no. 3, 2017, pp. 1-6. https://doi.org/10.11613/bm.2017.030201

Mlinarić, Ana, Martina Horvat and Vesna Šupak Smolčić. "Dealing with the positive publication bias: Why you should really publish your negative results." Biochemia Medica 27, no. 3 (2017): 1-6. https://doi.org/10.11613/bm.2017.030201

Mlinarić, A., Horvat, M. and Šupak Smolčić, V. (2017) 'Dealing with the positive publication bias: Why you should really publish your negative results', Biochemia Medica, 27(3), pp. 1-6. doi: 10.11613/bm.2017.030201

Mlinarić A, Horvat M, Šupak Smolčić V. Dealing with the positive publication bias: Why you should really publish your negative results. Biochemia Medica [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2025 April 16];27(3):1-6. doi: 10.11613/bm.2017.030201

A. Mlinarić, M. Horvat and V. Šupak Smolčić, "Dealing with the positive publication bias: Why you should really publish your negative results", Biochemia Medica, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 1-6, 2017. [Online]. Available at: https://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:184:202183. [Accessed: 16 April 2025]

Please login to the repository to save this object to your list.
Metadata
Title (english)Dealing with the positive publication bias: Why you should really publish your negative results
AuthorAna Mlinarić
AuthorMartina Horvat
AuthorVesna Šupak Smolčić
Author's institutionUniversity of Rijeka
Faculty of Medicine
(Department of Medical Informatics)
Scientific / art field,
discipline and subdiscipline		INTERDISCIPLINARY AREAS OF KNOWLEDGE
Integrative Bioethics (Natural, Technical, Biomedical and Healthcare, Social and Humanistic Sciences)
Abstract (english)
Studies with positive results are greatly more represented in literature than studies with negative results, producing so-called publication bias. This review aims to discuss occurring problems around negative results and to emphasize the importance of reporting negative results. Underreporting of negative results introduces bias into meta-analysis, which consequently misinforms researchers, doctors and policymakers. More resources are potentially wasted on already disputed research that remains unpublished and therefore unavailable to the scientific community. Ethical obligations need to be considered when reporting results of studies on human subjects as people have exposed themselves to risk with the assurance that the study is performed to benefit others. Some studies disprove the common conception that journal editors preferably publish positive findings, which are considered as more citable. Therefore, all stakeholders, but especially researchers, need to be conscious of disseminating negative and positive findings alike.
Keywords (english)
Languageenglish
Publication typeScientific paper - Review paper
Publication statusPublished
Peer reviewPeer review
Publication versionPublished version
Journal titleBiochemia Medica
Numberingvol. 27, no. 3, pp. 1-6
p-ISSN1330-0962
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.11613/bm.2017.030201
URN:NBNurn:nbn:hr:184:202183
Publication2017
Document URLhttp://bib.irb.hr/1045423
Type of resourceText
Access conditionsOpen access
Terms of useLicence Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) icon
Created on2022-02-15 17:30:23