Skip to main content

Table 2 Characteristics, main outcome results (overall and by whether or not the randomized controlled trial (RCT) described in the abstract was published), and the association with publication of the abstracts of RCTs presented at the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO) conferences during the years 2001–2004

From: Dependability of results in conference abstracts of randomized controlled trials in ophthalmology and author financial conflicts of interest as a factor associated with full publication

Characteristics

All abstracts (N = 513)

Abstracts of unpublished RCTs (N = 283)

Abstracts of published RCTs (N = 230)

Relative risks (RR) (95 % CI)

n (%**)

n (%**)

n (%**)

Characteristics of the RCTs

Funding

         
 

Not reported

241

(47.0)

137

(48.4)

104

(45.2)

  
 

Reported

272

(53.0)

146

(51.6)

126

(54.8)

  
 

 At least one funding source

158

(58.1)

73

(50.0)

85

(67.5)

1.32

(1.09–1.60)

 

  Industry (pharmaceutical or other)*

56

(20.7)

22

(15.1)

34

(27.0)

1.42

(1.12–1.79)

 

  Government*

71

(26.1)

31

(21.2)

40

(31.8)

1.31

(1.04–1.65)

 

  Other*

59

(21.7)

30

(20.6)

29

(23.0)

1.11

(0.84–1.47)

 

 No funding

114

(41.9)

73

(50.0)

41

(32.5)

0.76

(0.58–0.99)

Number of centers

         
 

Not reported

361

(70.4)

208

(73.5)

153

(66.5)

Ref

 
 

Reported

152

(29.6)

75

(26.5)

77

(33.5)

1.20

(0.98–1.46)

 

 Single center

46

(30.3)

31

(41.3)

15

(19.5)

Ref

 
 

 Multicenter

106

(69.7)

44

(58.7)

62

(80.5)

1.79

(1.15–2.80)

Presentation at ARVO

         

Poster

418

(81.5)

239

(84.5)

179

(77.8)

Ref

  

Oral

95

(18.5)

44

(15.5)

51

(22.2)

1.25

(1.01–1.56)

 

Main outcome results

         

Main outcome - Statistical significance

         
 

Not reported

285

(55.6)

178

(63.9)

107

(46.5)

Ref

 
 

Reported

228

(44.4)

105

(37.1)

123

(53.5)

1.44

(1.19–1.74)

 

 Not statistically significant

111

(48.7)

52

(49.5)

59

(48.0)

Ref

 
 

 Statistically significant

117

(51.3)

53

(50.5)

64

(52.0)

0.97

(0.76–1.24)

  1. * More than one option could apply to each abstract
  2. ** Percentages are column percentages. Percentages in the shaded rows are calculated using as the denominator number of abstracts reporting that characteristic
  3. Data (RRs and 95 % CIs) reported in bold text are statistically significant at the 5 % level