EBMH NOTEBOOK
The failure to know what isn't known: negative publication bias with lamotrigine and a glimpse inside peer review
Correspondence to:
Dr S N Ghaemi, Tufts Medical Center, Department of Psychiatry, 800 Washington St, Box 1007, Boston, MA 02111, USA; nghaemi@tuftsmedicalcenter.org
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
"There is a type of interaction between human beings which proceeds not from knowledge, or even lack of knowledge, but from failure to know what isnt known." John Kenneth Galbraith1
The medical literature meets Galbraiths description. Some things we know, and know that we know. Other things we do not know, and know that we do not know. But perhaps the largest class involves those things we do not know, and do not realise that we do not know.
This latter state of affairs is exemplified by the problem of negative studies. It has become increasingly clear that the medical literature is biased toward positive studies; negative studies are less frequently published.2 Sometimes this may reflect loss of passion, as disappointed researchers file away their negative results. Sometimes it may be systematic, as pharmaceutical sponsors may actively suppress negative data which would adversely impact their marketplace sales. And journals may
Register for free content
The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.
Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.
