Skip to main content

Table 5 Association between whether editors or peer reviewers asked for changes or clarifications to the primary outcome(s) and/or statistical analysis and specific journal and trial characteristics

From: Influence of peer review on the reporting of primary outcome(s) and statistical analyses of randomised trials

4. Did the editor or peer reviewers ask you to change or clarify the trial`s primary outcomes measure(s)?

Yes

No

Fisher’s exact test

P value

(n = 8)

(n = 250)

Type of journal

 General

3 (38%)

115 (46%)

0.73

0.46

 Specialty

5 (62%)

135 (54%)

Type of intervention

 Drug

2 (25%)

125 (50%)

0.28

0.15

 Non-drug

6 (75%)

125 (50%)

Statistical significance of primary outcome (where defined)a

 Significant

6 (86%)

110 (48%)

0.06

0.05

 Non-significant

1 (14%)

121 (52%)

Funding sourceb

 Sole/part industry

1 (14%)

78 (34%)

0.43

0.26

 Non-industry

6 (86%)

153 (66%)

5. Did the editors or peer reviewers ask you to change or clarify the statistical analysis of your primary outcome measure(s)?

Yes (n = 69)

No (n = 189)

Chi2 test

P value

Type of journal

 General

31 (45%)

87 (46%)

0.02

0.88

 Specialty

38 (55%)

102 (54%)

Type of intervention

 Drug

28 (41%)

99 (52%)

2.82

0.09

 Non-drug

41 (59%)

90 (48%)

Statistical significance of primary outcome (where defined)a

 Significant

27 (40%)

89 (52%)

2.66

0.10

 Non-significant

40 (60%)

82 (48%)

Funding sourceb

 Sole/part industry

17 (26%)

62 (36%)

1.20

0.16

 Non-industry

48 (74%)

111 (64%)

  1. aPrimary outcome clearly defined (n = 238)
  2. bSole/part industry funded and non-industry funded (n = 238)