Thombs Research Team is also working on other meta-research projects in the three main areas listed below:
(1) How conduct of research and incomplete reporting may influence results and the public’s perception of results;
(2) The potential influence of conflict of interest in research and guideline development;
(3) Factors that influence the integrity of the peer review process and whether it is likely to have its desired influence on the presentation of health research.
(4) There is very limited research on inclusion of gender-diverse individuals in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Gender-diverse individuals have specific health care needs, both related to transition and sex-binary health care. The purpose of this study is to examine the level of inclusion for gender-diverse individuals in Canadian and global CPGs. Primary questions included if CPGs (1) referred to gender-diverse individuals; (2) made specific recommendations
addressing care of gender-diverse individuals; (3) addressed implementation issues for gender-diverse individuals; (4) involved gender-diverse individuals in guideline creation. Inclusion, or lack thereof, of gender-diverse individuals in CPGs can impact quality of health care and provider decision-making.
(Names of members of research team staff and students in bold)
Levis B, Yan XW, He C, Sun Y, Benedetti A, Thombs BD. A comparison of depression prevalence estimates in meta-analyses based on screening tools and rating scales versus diagnostic interviews: a meta-research review. BMC Medicine. 2019;17:65.
Azar M, Riehm K, Saadat N, Sanchez T, Chiovitti M, Qi L, Rice DB, Levis B, Fedoruk C, Levis AW, Kloda LA, Kimmelman J, Benedetti A, Thombs BD. Journal registration policies and association with prospective registration in published randomized trials of non-regulated healthcare Interventions: a cross-sectional study. JAMA Internal Medicine. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.8009
Rice DB, Kloda LA, Shrier I, Benedetti A, Thombs BD. Methodological Quality of Meta-Analyses of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Depression Screening Tools. Journal of Psychosomatic Research. 2016 84;84-92
Rice DB, Kloda LA, Shrier I, Thombs BD. Reporting Completeness and Transparency of Meta-analyses of Depression Screening Tool Accuracy: A Comparison of Meta-analyses Published Before and After the PRISMA Statement. J Psychosom Res. 2016;87:57-69.
Coronado-Montoya S, Levis AW, Kwakkenbos L, Steele R, Turner EH, Thombs BD. Reporting of positive results in randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based mental health interventions. PLOS ONE. 11(4):e0153220.
Azar M, Riehm KE, McKay D, Thombs BD. Transparency of outcome reporting and trial registration of randomized controlled trials published in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. PLOS ONE. 2015;10(11):e0142894.
Riehm KE, Azar M, Thombs BD. Transparency of outcome reporting and trial registration of randomized controlled trials in top psychosomatic and behavioral health journals: A five-year follow-up. J Psychosom Res. 2015;75(1)1-12.
Thombs BD, Kwakkenbos L, Coronado-Montoya S. Trial registration in rheumatology: The next step. Arthritis Care Res. 2014;66(10):1435-1437.
Milette K, Roseman M, Thombs BD. Transparency of outcome reporting and trial registration of randomized controlled trials in psychosomatic and behavioural health research: A systematic review. J Psychosom Res. 2011;70(3):205-217.
Conflict of Interest:
Roseman M, Turner EH, Lexchin J, Coyne JC, Bero LA, Thombs BD. Reporting of conflict of interest from drug trials in Cochrane reviews: A cross-sectional study. BMJ. 2012;345:e5155.
Roseman M, Milette K, Bero LA, Lexchin J, Turner E, Coyne JC, Thombs BD. Reporting of conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of pharmacological treatments. JAMA. 2011;305(10):1008-1017.
Levis AW, Leentjens A, Levenson J, Lumley M, Thombs BD. Comparison of self-citation by peer reviewers in a journal with single-blind peer review versus a journal with open peer review. J Psychosom Res. 2015;79(6):561-565.
Thombs BD, Levis AW, Razykov I, Syamchandra A, Leentjens A, Levenson J, Lumley M. Potentially coercive self-citation via peer review: A cross sectional study. J Psychosom Res. 2015;78(1):7-11.
Thombs BD, Razykov I. Inappropriate self-citation via peer review: A simple solution. CMAJ. 2012;184(16):1864.