17 17. Schulz, K.F., Chalmers, I., Hayes, R.J. et al. (1995). Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 273: 408–412.
18 18. Dechartres, A., Trinquart, L., Faber, T. et al. (2016). Empirical evaluation of which trial characteristics are associated with treatment effect estimates. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 77: 24–37.
19 19. Pansieri, C., Pandolfini, C., and Bonati, M. (2015). The evolution in registration of clinical trials: a chronicle of the historical calls and current initiatives promoting transparency. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 71: 1159–1164.
20 20. Zarin, D.A., Tse, T., Williams, R.J. et al. (2017). Update on trial registration 11 years after the ICMJE policy was established. N. Engl. J. Med. 376: 383–391.
21 21. Howard, B., Scott, J.T., Blubaugh, M. et al. (2017). Systematic review: outcome reporting bias is a problem in high impact factor neurology journals. PLoS One https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0180986.
22 22. Wayant, C., Scheckel, C., Hicks, C. et al. (2017). Evidence of selective reporting bias in hematology journals: a systematic review. PLoS One https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178379.
23 23. Hannink, G., Gooszen, H.G., and Rovers, M.M. (2013). Comparison of registered and published primary outcomes in randomized clinical trials of surgical interventions. Ann. Surg. 257: 818–823.
24 24. Raghav, K.P., Mahajan, S., Yao, J.C. et al. (2015). From protocols to publications: a study in selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials in oncology. J. Clin. Oncol. 33: 3583–3590.
25 25. Dwan, K., Gamble, C., Williamson, P.R. et al. (2013). Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias – an updated review. PLoS One https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0066844.
26 26. Li, G., Abbade, L.P.F., Nwosu, I. et al. (2018). A systematic review of comparisons between protocols or registrations and full reports in primary biomedical research. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874‐017‐0465‐7.
27 27. Chen, T., Li, C., Qin, R. et al. (2019). Comparison of clinical trial changes in primary outcome and reported intervention effect size between trial registration and publication. JAMA Netw. Open https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.7242.
28 28. Smyth, R.M., Kirkham, J.J., Jacoby, A. et al. (2011). Frequency and reasons for outcome reporting bias in clinical trials: interviews with trialists. BMJ https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c7153.
29 29. van der Steen, J.T., van den Bogert, C.A., van Soest‐Poortvliet, M.C. et al. (2018). Determinants of selective reporting: a taxonomy based on content analysis of a random selection of the literature. PLoS One https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0188247.
30 30. Bello, S., Moustgaard, H., and Hrobjartsson, A. (2017). Unreported formal assessment of unblinding occurred in 4 of 10 randomized clinical trials, unreported loss of blinding in 1 of 10 trials. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 81: 42–50.
31 31. Bello, S., Moustgaard, H., and Hrobjartsson, A. (2014). The risk of unblinding was infrequently and incompletely reported in 300 randomized clinical trial publications. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 67: 1059–1069.
32 32. Yi, J., Haibo, H.L., Li, Y. et al. (2020). Risk of bias and its impact on intervention effect estimates of randomized controlled trials in endodontics. J. Endodontics 46: 12–18.
33 33. Moustgaard, H., Clayton, G.L., Jones, H.E. et al. (2020). Impact of blinding on estimated treatment effects in randomised clinical trials: meta‐epidemiological study. BMJ https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l6802.
34 34. Huupponen, R. and Viikari, J. (2013). Statins and the risk of developing diabetes. BMJ https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f3156.
35 35. Tang, E., Ravaud, P., Riveros, C. et al. (2015). Comparison of serious adverse events posted at http://ClinicalTrials.gov and published in corresponding journal articles. BMC Med. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916‐015‐0430‐4.
36 36. Favier, R. and Crepin, S. (2018). The reporting of harms in publications on randomized controlled trials funded by the “Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique,” a French academic funding scheme. Clin. Trials 15: 257–267.
37 37. Hughes, S., Cohen, D., and Jaggi, R. (2014). Differences in reporting serious adverse events in industry sponsored clinical trial registries and journal articles on antidepressant and antipsychotic drugs: a cross‐sectional study. BMJ Open https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen‐2014‐005535.
38 38. Golder, S., Loke, Y.K., Wright, K. et al. (2016). Reporting of adverse events in published and unpublished studies of health care interventions: a systematic review. PLoS Med. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002127.
39 39. Hodkinson, A., Kirkham, J.J., Tudur‐Smith, C. et al. (2013). Reporting of harms data in RCTs: a systematic review of empirical assessments against the CONSORT harms extension. BMJ Open https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen‐2013‐003436.
40 40. Fewtrell, M.S., Kennedy, K., Singhal, A. et al. (2008). How much loss to follow‐up is acceptable in long‐term randomised trials and prospective studies? Arch. Dis. Child. 93: 458–461.
41 41. Schulz, K.F. and Grimes, D.A. (2002). Sample size slippages in randomised trials: exclusions and the lost and wayward. Lancet 359: 781–785.
42 42. Akl, E.A., Briel, M., You, J.J. et al. (2012). Potential impact on estimated treatment effects of information lost to follow‐up in randomised controlled trials (LOST‐IT): systematic review. BMJ https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e2809.
43 43. Zhang, Y., Florez, I.D., Colunga Lozano, L.E. et al. (2017). A systematic survey on reporting and methods for handling missing participant data for continuous outcomes in randomized controlled trials. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 88: 57–66.
44 44. Nuesch, E., Trelle, S., Reichenbach, S. et al. (2009). The effects of excluding patients from the analysis in randomised controlled trials: meta‐epidemiological study. BMJ https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b3244.
45 45. Bell, M.L., Fiero, M., Horton, N.J. et al. (2014). Handling missing data in RCTs; a review of the top medical journals. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471‐2288‐14‐118.
46 46. Walters, S.J., Bonacho Dos Anjos Henriques‐Cadby, I., Bortolami, O. et al. (2017). Recruitment and retention of participants in randomised controlled trials: a review of trials funded and published by the United Kingdom Health Technology Assessment Programme. BMJ Open https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen‐2016‐015276.
47 47. Hussain, J.A., White, I.R., Langan, D. et al. (2016). Missing data in randomized controlled trials testing palliative interventions pose a significant risk of bias and loss of power: a systematic review and meta‐analyses.