Why Current Publication Practices May Distort Science

1. ThalerRH

1988

Anomalies: The winner's curse.

J Econ Perspect

2

191

202

2. CoxJCIsaacRM

1984

In search of the winner's curse.

Econ Inq

22

579

592

3. DyerDKagelJH

1996

Bidding in common value auctions: How the commercial construction industry corrects for the winner's curse.

Manage Sci

42

1463

1475

4. HarrisonGWListJA

2007

Naturally occurring markets and exogenous laboratory experiments: A case study of the winner's curse

NBER Working Paper No. 13072

1

20

Cambridge (MA)

National Bureau of Economic Research

5. CapenECClappRVCampbellWM

1971

Competitive bidding in high-risk situations.

J Petrol Technol

23

641

653

6. CassingJDouglasRW

1980

Implications of the auction mechanism in baseball's free-agent draft.

South Econ J

47

110

121

7. DessauerJP

1981

Book publishing: What it is, what it does

2nd edition

New York

R. R. Bowker

8. HendricksKPorterRHBoudreauB

1987

Information, returns, and bidding behavior in OCS auctions: 1954–1969.

J Ind Econ

35

517

542

9. IoannidisJPA

2005

Contradicted and initially stronger effects in highly cited clinical research.

J Am Med Assoc

294

218

228

10. KrzyzanowskaMKPintilieMTannockIF

2003

Factors associated with failure to publish large randomized trials presented at an oncology meeting.

J Am Med Assoc

290

495

501

11. SternJM

2006

Publication bias: Evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects.

Br Med J

315

640

645

12. GoodmanSN

2008

Systematic reviews are not biased by results from trials stopped early for benefit.

J Clin Epidemiol

61

95

96

13. BasslerDFerreira-GonzalezIBrielMCookDJDevereauxPJ

2007

Systematic reviewers neglect bias that results from trials stopped early for benefit.

J Clin Epidemiol

60

869

873

14. IoannidisJP

2008

Why most discovered true associations are inflated.

Epidemiology

19

640

648

15. KavvouraFKLiberopoulosGIoannidisJPA

2007

Selection in reported epidemiological risks: An empirical assessment.

PLoS Med

4

e79

doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040079

16. KyzasPADenaxa-KyzaDIoannidisJP

2007

Almost all articles on cancer prognostic markers report statistically significant results.

Eur J Cancer

43

2559

2579

17. TurnerEHMatthewsAMLinardatosETellRARosenthalR

2008

Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy.

N Eng J Med

358

252

260

18. IoannidisJPATrikalinosTA

2005

Early extreme contradictory estimates may appear in published research: The Proteus phenomenon in molecular genetics research and randomized trials.

J Clin Epidemiol

58

543

549

19. IoannidisJPA

2005

Why most published research findings are false.

PLoS Med

2

e124

doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

20. EasterbrookPBerlinJAGopalanRMatthewsDR

1991

Publication bias in clinical research.

Lancet

337

867

872

21. IoannidisJP

2006

Evolution and translation of research findings: From bench to where.

PLoS Clin Trials

1

e36

doi:10.1371/journal.pctr.0010036

22. Contopoulos-IoannidisDGNtzaniEIoannidisJP

2003

Translation of highly promising basic science research into clinical applications.

Am J Med

114

477

484

23. National Human Genome Research Institute

2008

The Cancer Genome Atlas.

Available: http://www.genome.gov/17516564. Accessed 4 September 2008

24. FrankRHCookPJ

1995

The winner-take-all society

New York

Free Press

25. GoodmanSNAltmanDGGeorgeSL

1998

Statistical reviewing policies of medical journals: Caveat lector.

J Gen Intern Med

13

753

756

26. Biomed Central

2008

Most viewed articles in past year.

Available: http://www.biomedcentral.com/mostviewedbyyear/. Accessed 4 September 2008

27. The PLoS Medicine Editors

2006

The impact factor game.

PLoS Med

3

e291

doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0030291

28. SmithR

2006

Commentary: The power of the unrelenting impact factor—Is it a force for good or harm.

Int J Epidemiol

35

1129

1130

29. AndersenJBelmontJChoCT

2006

Journal impact factor in the era of expanding literature.

J Microbiol Immunol Infect

39

436

443

30. HaTCTanSBSooKC

2006

The journal impact factor: Too much of an impact.

Ann Acad Med Singapore

35

911

916

31. SongFEastwoodABilbodySDuleyL

1999

The role of electronic journals in reducing publication bias.

Med Inform

24

223

229

32. RossnerMVan EppsHHillE

2007

Show me the data.

J Exp Med

204

3052

3053

33. ChewMVillanuevaEVvan der WeydenMB

2007

Life and times of the impact factor: Retrospective analysis of trends for seven medical journals (1994–2005) and their editors' views.

J Royal Soc Med

100

142

150

34. RoncoC

2006

Scientific journals: Who impacts the impact factor.

Int J Artif Organs

29

645

648

35. IoannidisJPA

2006

Concentration of the most-cited papers in the scientific literature: analysis of journal ecosystems.

PLoS ONE

1

e5

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000005

36. PanZTrikalinosTAKavvouraFKLauJIoannidisJP

2005

Local literature bias in genetic epidemiology: An empirical evaluation of the Chinese literature.

PLoS Med

2

e334

doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020334

37. IrelandNJ

1994

On limiting the market for status signals.

J Public Econ

53

91

110

38. BeckerGS

1991

A note on restaurant pricing and other examples of social influences on price.

Polit Econ

99

1109

1116

39. DasguptaPDavidPA

1994

Toward a new economics of science.

Res Pol

23

487

521

40. BikhchandaniSHirshleiferDWelchI

1998

Learning from the behavior of others: Conformity, fads, and informational cascades.

J Econ Perspect

12

151

170

41. HirshleiferDTeohSH

2003

Herd behaviour and cascading in capital markets: A review and synthesis.

Eur Financ Manage

9

25

66

42. RzhetskyALossifovILohJMWhiteKP

2007

Microparadigms: Chains of collective reasoning in publications about molecular interactions.

Proc Nat Acad Sci U S A

103

4940

4945

43. Nature

2008

Getting published in Nature: The editorial process.

Available: http://www.nature.com/nature/authors/get_published/index.html. Accessed 4 September 2008

44. Science

2008

About Science and AAAS.

Available: http://www.sciencemag.org/help/about/about.dtl. Accessed 4 September 2008

45. MertonRK

1957

Priorities in scientific discovery: A chapter in the sociology of science.

Am Sociol Rev

22

635

659

46. OlsonCMRennieDCookDDickersinKFlanaginA

2002

Publication bias in editorial decision making.

J Am Med Assoc

287

2825

2828

47. BrownAKraftDSchmitzSMSharplessVMartinC

2006

Association of industry sponsorship to published outcomes in gastrointestinal clinical research.

Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol

4

1445

1451

48. PatsopoulosNAAnalatosAAIoannidisJPA

2006

Origin and funding of the most equently cited papers in medicine: Database analysis.

Br Med J

332

1061

1064

49. BubelaTMCaulfieldTA

2004

Do the print media “hype” genetic research? A comparison of newspaper stories and peer-reviewed research papers.

Canad Med Assoc J

170

1399

1407

50. PolanyiM

1964

Science, faith and society

2nd edition

Chicago

University of Chicago Press

51. DickersinKChanSChalmersTCSacksHSSmithHJr

1987

Publication bias and clinical trials.

Control Clin Trials

8

343

353

52. CallahamMLWearsRLWeberEJBartonCYoungG

1998

Positive-outcome bias and other limitations in the outcome of research abstracts submitted to a scientific meeting.

J Am Med Assoc

280

254

257

53. KahnemanD

2003

A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality.

Am Psychol

58

697

720

54. IoannidisJPA

2006

Journals should publish all “null” results and should sparingly publish “positive” results.

Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev

15

185

55. PopperK

1959

The logic of scientific discovery

New York

Basic Books