Potential bias in ophthalmic pharmaceutical clinical trials

Abstract

To make clinicians aware of potential sources of error in ophthalmic pharmaceutical clinical trials that can lead to erroneous interpretation of results, a critical review of the study design of various pharmaceutical ophthalmic clinical trials was completed. Discrepancies as a result of study shortcomings may explain observed differences between reported ophthalmic trial data and observed clinical results.

Effect of funding source on reporting bias in studies of intravitreal anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy for retinal vein occlusion

“…On the other hand, Howard and colleagues found that industry‐funded neurology studies were more likely to have improperly registered their RCT in favour of statistically significant results (Howard et al. ), and Varner discussed extensively about potential bias in the field of ophthalmology (Varner ). When Alasbali et al.…”

“…Although industry support can help to improve study quality (Brown et al. ) and to offset the staggering costs of drug development and pharmaceutical trials (Varner ), this potentiates industry‐influenced reporting bias given possible conflict of interest (Chiu et al. ).…”

“…). In an era with rapid development of novel therapies, physicians rely on peer‐reviewed journals to stay well informed but often do not have the time to assess the literature to detect such potential bias and to review financial disclosures (Barton ; Varner ).…”

“…There is conflicting evidence regarding whether industry support does (Varner ; Alasbali et al. ; Howard et al.…”

Does Ophthalmology Need Philosophy?

“…Using publications with a high citation index and a practical orientation, as well as checking the accuracy of information related to the physicians’ workplace, hospital conditions, and patient group may help prevent these logical fallacies. 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 …”