Unpublished rating scales: A major source of bias in randomised controlled trials of treatments for schizophrenia

By M. Marshall, A. Lockwood, C. Bradley, C. Adams, Clair Joy, M. Fenton. British Journal of Psychiatry, 2000

699 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Psychiatry and Mental health, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b21cfd8f6a2550339df128b4a2661f9cdfc0d521

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Psychiatry and Mental health

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

A methodological review of resilience measurement scales (2011, background): “[13] found that clinical trials evaluating interventions for people with schizophrenia were almost 40% more likely to report that treatment was effective when they used unpublished scales as opposed to validated measures.”
CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. (2012, background): “In non-pharmacological trials, a third of the claims of treat-ment superiority based on unpublished scales would not have been made if a published scale had been used [109].”
Schizophrenia trials: past, present and future (2002, result): “Further work by this group attempted to determine whether there was an association between using an unpublished outcome rating scale and finding a significant effect of treatment in randomised controlled trials of interventions for schizophrenia ( Marshall et al., 2000a ).”
Reporting of patient-reported outcomes in randomized trials: the CONSORT PRO extension. (2013, methodology): “If an RCT uses a PRO instrument with psychometric properties that have not yet been published (eg, a new instrument developed for the trial), the authors should provide information on item content of the instrument and evidence regarding its reliability and validity, in an appendix if the article do”
Association between duration of untreated psychosis and outcome in cohorts of first-episode patients: a systematic review. (2005, neutral): “Data on primary or secondary outcomes were excluded if they were collected using unpublished scales.(13) Data were extracted independently by 2 raters (M.”
The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study (2010, methodology): “To our knowledge, Marshall [3] is the only one who empirically showed that the results of studies can differ when validated measurement instruments are used compared to studies in which non-validated instruments are used.”