{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,7]],"date-time":"2026-07-07T00:15:11Z","timestamp":1783383311836,"version":"3.54.6"},"reference-count":38,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,13]],"date-time":"2026-05-13T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1778630400000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,7]],"date-time":"2026-07-07T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1783382400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":55,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100001779","name":"Monash University","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","award":["FLPF23-1069865460"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["FLPF23-1069865460"]}],"id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100001779","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]},{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100000925","name":"National Health and Medical Research Council","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","award":["GNT2033917"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["GNT2033917"]}],"id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100000925","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]},{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100000925","name":"National Health and Medical Research Council","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","award":["GNT2009612"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["GNT2009612"]}],"id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100000925","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]},{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100000923","name":"Australian Research Council","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","award":["DE200101618"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["DE200101618"]}],"id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100000923","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["BMC Public Health"],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Selective reporting bias occurs when authors report outcomes or results based on the P value, magnitude or direction of the results. Selective reporting has not been examined in interrupted time series (ITS) studies. Therefore, we investigated (1) discrepancies between outcomes specified in protocols and those reported in the corresponding results reports, (2) completeness of results reporting, and (3) whether there was evidence of selective reporting bias in ITS studies.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>We systematically searched for published peer-reviewed protocols of ITS studies of health interventions in 22 databases, and corresponding results reports addressing the protocol\u2019s primary ITS research question. We identified outcomes that were reported in the protocol and the corresponding results report(s), and all results reported for those outcomes. We defined a discrepancy as any outcome that was missing from the protocol or results report, or had its primacy reclassified (e.g., from primary to secondary) in the results reports compared to the protocol. Each result was classified as fully reported if it was reported with both an effect estimate and a measure of precision (e.g. confidence interval). Each result was also classified as favourable or not favourable to the interruption, based on its statistical significance and direction of effect.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Our search for ITS protocols returned 4,590 abstracts. After excluding ongoing studies, protocols without published results for the primary research question, and records excluded for other reasons, we identified 44 ITS protocols (published 2010\u20132022) with 46 corresponding results reports. From these, we extracted 553 outcomes. Non-reporting of outcomes was prevalent, with 24% (132\/553) of outcomes defined in the protocol not reported in the results report, and 60% (25\/42) of protocols having at least one outcome not reported in the result reports. Among the 388 outcomes that could be assessed for discrepancies, 52% (202\/388) had a discrepancy, affecting 74% (31\/42) of studies. Only 28% (56\/202) of discrepancies were justified by authors in the results reports. The association between a result favouring the interruption (based on statistical significance and direction of effect) and the result being fully reported was uncertain (OR\u2009=\u20091.06 [95% CI 0.74 to 1.53]).<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Non-reporting of outcomes and discrepancies in outcome reporting were prevalent. Pre-specifying outcomes in protocols and registries helps mitigate selective reporting. However, outcomes should be described in sufficient detail for readers to detect any changes.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1186\/s12889-026-27475-1","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,13]],"date-time":"2026-05-13T03:02:42Z","timestamp":1778641362000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["An investigation of discrepancies in outcome reporting and selective reporting bias in interrupted time series studies of health interventions: a methodological study"],"prefix":"10.1186","volume":"26","author":[{"given":"Phi-Yen","family":"Nguyen","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Simon L.","family":"Turner","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Elizabeth","family":"Korevaar","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Matthew J.","family":"Page","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Joanne E.","family":"McKenzie","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,13]]},"reference":[{"key":"27475_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e080505","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj-2024-080505","volume":"388","author":"P Craig","year":"2025","unstructured":"Craig P, Campbell M, Deidda M, Dundas R, Green J, Katikireddi SV, et al. Using natural experiments to evaluate population health and health system interventions: new framework for producers and users of evidence. BMJ. 2025;388:e080505. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj-2024-080505.","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"27475_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"950","DOI":"10.1016\/J.JCLINEPI.2014.12.018","volume":"68","author":"R Jandoc","year":"2015","unstructured":"Jandoc R, Burden AM, Mamdani M, L\u00e9vesque LE, Cadarette SM. Interrupted time series analysis in drug utilization research is increasing: systematic review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015;68:950\u20136. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/J.JCLINEPI.2014.12.018.","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"key":"27475_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e003567","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjgh-2020-003567","volume":"5","author":"C Hategeka","year":"2020","unstructured":"Hategeka C, Ruton H, Karamouzian M, Lynd LD, Law MR. Use of interrupted time series methods in the evaluation of health system quality improvement interventions: a methodological systematic review. BMJ Glob Health. 2020;5:e003567. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmjgh-2020-003567.","journal-title":"BMJ Glob Health"},{"key":"27475_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"411","DOI":"10.2147\/JMDH.S241085","volume":"13","author":"JE Ewusie","year":"2020","unstructured":"Ewusie JE, Soobiah C, Blondal E, Beyene J, Thabane L, Hamid JS, Methods. Applications and Challenges in the Analysis of Interrupted Time Series Data: A Scoping Review. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2020;13:411\u201323. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2147\/JMDH.S241085.","journal-title":"J Multidiscip Healthc"},{"key":"27475_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"82","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2018.05.026","volume":"103","author":"J Lopez Bernal","year":"2018","unstructured":"Lopez Bernal J, Soumerai S, Gasparrini A. A methodological framework for model selection in interrupted time series studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;103:82\u201391. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2018.05.026.","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"key":"27475_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"348","DOI":"10.1093\/ije\/dyw098","volume":"46","author":"J Lopez Bernal","year":"2017","unstructured":"Lopez Bernal J, Cummins S, Gasparrini A. Interrupted time series regression for the evaluation of public health interventions: a tutorial. Int J Epidemiol. 2017;46:348\u201355. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/ije\/dyw098.","journal-title":"Int J Epidemiol"},{"key":"27475_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"134","DOI":"10.1186\/s12874-021-01306-w","volume":"21","author":"SL Turner","year":"2021","unstructured":"Turner SL, Karahalios A, Forbes AB, Taljaard M, Grimshaw JM, McKenzie JE. Comparison of six statistical methods for interrupted time series studies: empirical evaluation of 190 published series. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021;21:134. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12874-021-01306-w.","journal-title":"BMC Med Res Methodol"},{"key":"27475_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"181","DOI":"10.1186\/s12874-021-01364-0","volume":"21","author":"SL Turner","year":"2021","unstructured":"Turner SL, Forbes AB, Karahalios A, Taljaard M, McKenzie JE. Evaluation of statistical methods used in the analysis of interrupted time series studies: a simulation study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021;21:181. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12874-021-01364-0.","journal-title":"BMC Med Res Methodol"},{"key":"27475_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"58","DOI":"10.1186\/s12874-021-01235-8","volume":"21","author":"AL Schaffer","year":"2021","unstructured":"Schaffer AL, Dobbins TA, Pearson S-A. Interrupted time series analysis using autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) models: a guide for evaluating large-scale health interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021;21:58. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12874-021-01235-8.","journal-title":"BMC Med Res Methodol"},{"key":"27475_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"137","DOI":"10.1186\/s12874-019-0777-x","volume":"19","author":"J Hudson","year":"2019","unstructured":"Hudson J, Fielding S, Ramsay CR. Methodology and reporting characteristics of studies using interrupted time series design in healthcare. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019;19:137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12874-019-0777-x.","journal-title":"BMC Med Res Methodol"},{"key":"27475_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"55","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2022.01.010","volume":"145","author":"E Korevaar","year":"2022","unstructured":"Korevaar E, Karahalios A, Turner SL, Forbes AB, Taljaard M, Cheng AC, et al. Methodological systematic review recommends improvements to conduct and reporting when meta-analyzing interrupted time series studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2022;145:55\u201369. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2022.01.010.","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"key":"27475_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"c365","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.c365","volume":"340","author":"JJ Kirkham","year":"2010","unstructured":"Kirkham JJ, Dwan KM, Altman DG, Gamble C, Dodd S, Smyth R, et al. The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews. BMJ. 2010;340:c365. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj.c365.","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"27475_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"359","DOI":"10.1111\/1467-9876.00197","volume":"49","author":"JL Hutton","year":"2000","unstructured":"Hutton JL, Williamson PR. Bias in Meta-Analysis Due to Outcome Variable Selection Within Studies. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat. 2000;49:359\u201370. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/1467-9876.00197.","journal-title":"J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat"},{"key":"27475_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e076754","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj-2023-076754","volume":"383","author":"MJ Page","year":"2023","unstructured":"Page MJ, Sterne JAC, Boutron I, Hr\u00f3bjartsson A, Kirkham JJ, Li T, et al. ROB-ME: a tool for assessing risk of bias due to missing evidence in systematic reviews with meta-analysis. BMJ. 2023;383:e076754. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj-2023-076754.","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"27475_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"d7202","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.d7202","volume":"344","author":"B Hart","year":"2012","unstructured":"Hart B, Lundh A, Bero L. Effect of reporting bias on meta-analyses of drug trials: reanalysis of meta-analyses. BMJ. 2012;344:d7202. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj.d7202.","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"27475_CR16","volume-title":"Selective Outcome Reporting as a Source of Bias in Reviews of Comparative Effectiveness","author":"SL Norris","year":"2012","unstructured":"Norris SL, Holmer HK, Ogden LA, Fu R, Abou-Setta AM, Viswanathan MS, et al. Selective Outcome Reporting as a Source of Bias in Reviews of Comparative Effectiveness. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2012."},{"key":"27475_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"MR000035","DOI":"10.1002\/14651858.MR000035.pub2","volume":"2014","author":"MJ Page","year":"2014","unstructured":"Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Kirkham J, Dwan K, Kramer S, Green S, et al. Bias due to selective inclusion and reporting of outcomes and analyses in systematic reviews of randomised trials of healthcare interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;2014:MR000035. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/14651858.MR000035.pub2.","journal-title":"Cochrane Database Syst Rev"},{"key":"27475_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e1001666","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pmed.1001666","volume":"11","author":"K Dwan","year":"2014","unstructured":"Dwan K, Altman DG, Clarke M, Gamble C, Higgins JPT, Sterne JAC, et al. Evidence for the selective reporting of analyses and discrepancies in clinical trials: a systematic review of cohort studies of clinical trials. PLoS Med. 2014;11:e1001666. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pmed.1001666.","journal-title":"PLoS Med"},{"key":"27475_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e66844","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0066844","volume":"8","author":"K Dwan","year":"2013","unstructured":"Dwan K, Gamble C, Williamson PR, Kirkham JJ, Reporting Bias Group. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias - an updated review. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e66844. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0066844.","journal-title":"PLoS ONE"},{"key":"27475_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"9","DOI":"10.1186\/s12874-017-0465-7","volume":"18","author":"G Li","year":"2018","unstructured":"Li G, Abbade LPF, Nwosu I, Jin Y, Leenus A, Maaz M, et al. A systematic review of comparisons between protocols or registrations and full reports in primary biomedical research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18:9. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12874-017-0465-7.","journal-title":"BMC Med Res Methodol"},{"key":"27475_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"79","DOI":"10.1186\/1471-2288-9-79","volume":"9","author":"F Song","year":"2009","unstructured":"Song F, Parekh-Bhurke S, Hooper L, Loke YK, Ryder JJ, Sutton AJ, et al. Extent of publication bias in different categories of research cohorts: a meta-analysis of empirical studies. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009;9:79. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/1471-2288-9-79.","journal-title":"BMC Med Res Methodol"},{"key":"27475_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Nguyen P-Y, Turner S, Korevaar E, Forbes A, Page MJ, McKenzie JE. Investigation of reporting bias in interrupted time series (ITS) studies: a study protocol. F1000Research. 2024. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.12688\/f1000research.145927.2.","DOI":"10.12688\/f1000research.145927.2"},{"key":"27475_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"627","DOI":"10.1002\/jrsm.1716","volume":"15","author":"P-Y Nguyen","year":"2024","unstructured":"Nguyen P-Y, McKenzie JE, Turner SL, Page MJ, McDonald S. Development of a search filter to retrieve reports of interrupted time series studies from MEDLINE and PubMed. Res Synth Methods. 2024;15:627\u201340. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/jrsm.1716.","journal-title":"Res Synth Methods"},{"key":"27475_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1432","DOI":"10.1111\/1475-6773.12279","volume":"50","author":"SB Dusetzina","year":"2015","unstructured":"Dusetzina SB, Brookhart MA, Maciejewski ML. Control Outcomes and Exposures for Improving Internal Validity of Nonrandomized Studies. Health Serv Res. 2015;50:1432\u201351. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/1475-6773.12279.","journal-title":"Health Serv Res"},{"key":"27475_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"852","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMsa1012065","volume":"364","author":"DA Zarin","year":"2011","unstructured":"Zarin DA, Tse T, Williams RJ, Califf RM, Ide NC. The ClinicalTrials.gov Results Database \u2014 Update and Key Issues. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:852\u201360. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1056\/NEJMsa1012065.","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"key":"27475_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Dickersin K, Li T, Mayo-Wilson E. The Benefits and Challenges of Using Multiple Sources of Information about Clinical Trials. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI); 2018. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.25302\/3.2018.ME.13035785.","DOI":"10.25302\/3.2018.ME.13035785"},{"key":"27475_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e1004306","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pmed.1004306","volume":"20","author":"M Holst","year":"2023","unstructured":"Holst M, Haslberger M, Yerunkar S, Strech D, Hemkens LG, Carlisle BG. Frequency of multiple changes to prespecified primary outcomes of clinical trials completed between 2009 and 2017 in German university medical centers: A meta-research study. PLoS Med. 2023;20:e1004306. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pmed.1004306.","journal-title":"PLoS Med"},{"key":"27475_CR28","unstructured":"StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 18. 2025."},{"key":"27475_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"c7153","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.c7153","volume":"342","author":"RMD Smyth","year":"2011","unstructured":"Smyth RMD, Kirkham JJ, Jacoby A, Altman DG, Gamble C, Williamson PR. Frequency and reasons for outcome reporting bias in clinical trials: interviews with trialists. BMJ. 2011;342:c7153. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj.c7153.","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"27475_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1007\/s10654-021-00839-0","volume":"37","author":"JR Baldwin","year":"2022","unstructured":"Baldwin JR, Pingault J-B, Schoeler T, Sallis HM, Munaf\u00f2 MR. Protecting against researcher bias in secondary data analysis: challenges and potential solutions. Eur J Epidemiol. 2022;37:1\u201310. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10654-021-00839-0.","journal-title":"Eur J Epidemiol"},{"key":"27475_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"735","DOI":"10.1503\/cmaj.1041086","volume":"171","author":"A-W Chan","year":"2004","unstructured":"Chan A-W, Krleza-Jeri\u0107 K, Schmid I, Altman DG. Outcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. CMAJ Can Med Assoc J J Assoc Medicale Can. 2004;171:735\u201340. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1503\/cmaj.1041086.","journal-title":"CMAJ Can Med Assoc J J Assoc Medicale Can"},{"key":"27475_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2457","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.291.20.2457","volume":"291","author":"A-W Chan","year":"2004","unstructured":"Chan A-W, Hr\u00f3bjartsson A, Haahr MT, G\u00f8tzsche PC, Altman DG. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA. 2004;291:2457\u201365. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.291.20.2457.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"key":"27475_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1016\/J.JCLINEPI.2020.02.006","volume":"122","author":"SL Turner","year":"2020","unstructured":"Turner SL, Karahalios A, Forbes AB, Taljaard M, Grimshaw JM, Cheng AC, et al. Design characteristics and statistical methods used in interrupted time series studies evaluating public health interventions: a review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020;122:1\u201311. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/J.JCLINEPI.2020.02.006.","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"key":"27475_CR34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e081124","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj-2024-081124","volume":"389","author":"S Hopewell","year":"2025","unstructured":"Hopewell S, Chan A-W, Collins GS, Hr\u00f3bjartsson A, Moher D, Schulz KF, et al. CONSORT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials. BMJ. 2025;389:e081124. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj-2024-081124.","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"27475_CR35","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"220142","DOI":"10.1098\/rsos.220142","volume":"9","author":"TARG Meta-Research Group and Collaborators","year":"2022","unstructured":"TARG Meta-Research Group and Collaborators. Discrepancy review: a feasibility study of a novel peer review intervention to reduce undisclosed discrepancies between registrations and publications. R Soc Open Sci. 2022;9:220142. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1098\/rsos.220142.","journal-title":"R Soc Open Sci"},{"key":"27475_CR36","unstructured":"Ying X, Vorland CJ, Ninan K, Oberste J-P, Brown AW, Qureshi R et al. Using GPT to identify changes in clinical trial outcomes registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. Int Congr Peer Rev Sci Publ. 2025. https:\/\/peerreviewcongress.org\/abstract\/using-gpt-to-identify-changes-in-clinical-trial-outcomes-registered-on-clinicaltrials-gov\/."},{"key":"27475_CR37","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2831","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.287.21.2831","volume":"287","author":"CA Silagy","year":"2002","unstructured":"Silagy CA, Middleton P, Hopewell S. Publishing protocols of systematic reviews: comparing what was done to what was planned. JAMA. 2002;287:2831\u20134. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.287.21.2831.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"key":"27475_CR38","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e002709","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjopen-2013-002709","volume":"3","author":"K Dwan","year":"2013","unstructured":"Dwan K, Kirkham JJ, Williamson PR, Gamble C. Selective reporting of outcomes in randomised controlled trials in systematic reviews of cystic fibrosis. BMJ Open. 2013;3:e002709. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmjopen-2013-002709.","journal-title":"BMJ Open"}],"container-title":["BMC Public Health"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1186\/s12889-026-27475-1","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s12889-026-27475-1.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s12889-026-27475-1.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,6]],"date-time":"2026-07-06T23:28:55Z","timestamp":1783380535000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1186\/s12889-026-27475-1"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,13]]},"references-count":38,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,12]]}},"alternative-id":["27475"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12889-026-27475-1","relation":{"has-preprint":[{"id-type":"doi","id":"10.21203\/rs.3.rs-8090224\/v1","asserted-by":"object"}]},"ISSN":["1471-2458"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1471-2458","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,13]]},"assertion":[{"value":"11 November 2025","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"16 April 2026","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"13 May 2026","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"This study was conducted using publicly available data and did not involve human participants, identifiable personal data, animal subjects, or interventions requiring ethical approval. Data related to the included studies was deidentified and anonymised using unique identification numbers.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethics approval and consent to participate"}},{"value":"Not applicable. This study does not contain any individual person\u2019s data in any form (including individual details, images or videos),","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Consent for publication"}},{"value":"The authors declare no competing interests.","order":4,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Competing interests"}}],"article-number":"2061"}}