What question did this study set out to answer?

This review aims to explore the prevalence of publication bias in clinical trials for coronary artery disease.

April 21, 2026

Publication Bias in Coronary Artery Disease Clinical Trials: A Bibliometric Review

Key Points

This review aims to explore the prevalence of publication bias in clinical trials for coronary artery disease.
Conducted a bibliometric review of coronary artery disease clinical trials.
Analyzed publication rates for positive versus negative outcomes.
Assessed the implication of these findings on evidence-based medicine.
Positive clinical trial outcomes were published more frequently than negative results.
This bias could distort physicians' reliance on available data.
The lack of negative result publications may compromise the quality of patient care.

Abstract

Positive outcomes had a higher publication rate compared with the negative results. Identification of this bias is critical in addressing the impact it could have on the practice of evidence-based medicine. If negative results are not being published, then this pushes physicians to rely on positive results more heavily, thereby skewing evidence-based decision making. This in turn impacts decisions that affect the quality of care.

Publication Bias in Coronary Artery Disease Clinical Trials: A Bibliometric Review

Key Points

Abstract

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider