Abstract
Introduction Previous studies about the replicability of clinical research based on the published literature have suggested that highly cited articles are often contradicted or found to have inflated effects. Nevertheless, there are no recent updates of such efforts, and this situation may have changed over time.
Methods We searched the Web of Science database for articles studying medical interventions with more than 2000 citations, published between 2004 and 2018 in high-impact medical journals. We then searched for replications of these studies in PubMed using the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparator and Outcome) framework. Replication success was evaluated by the presence of a statistically significant effect in the same direction and by overlap of the replication’s effect size confidence interval (CIs) with that of the original study. Evidence of effect size inflation and potential predictors of replicability were also analyzed.
Results A total of 89 eligible studies, of which 24 had valid replications (17 meta-analyses and 7 primary studies) were found. Of these, 21 (88%) had effect sizes with overlapping CIs. Of 15 highly cited studies with a statistically significant difference in the primary outcome, 13 (87%) had a significant effect in the replication as well. When both criteria were considered together, the replicability rate in our sample was of 20 out of 24 (83%). There was no evidence of systematic inflation in these highly cited studies, with a mean effect size ratio of 1.03 (95% CI [0.88, 1.21]) between initial and subsequent effects. Due to the small number of contradicted results, our analysis had low statistical power to detect predictors of replicability.
Conclusion Although most studies did not have eligible replications, the replicability rate of highly cited clinical studies in our sample was higher than in previous estimates, with little evidence of systematic effect size inflation.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
This version of the manuscript has been revised to include independent replications in the analyses. That is, when replications were meta-analyses, we removed the highly-cited study from each and recalculated the result when possible, making the replication independent of the highly-cited study. We also recalculated replicability rates, effect size inflation and predictors of replicability under this scenario. These analyses are going to be submitted as supplementary work, also on Open Science Framework. The main goal was to see that if the fact that most of the replications of our sample being meta-analyses that included the highly-cited study was a problem, due to the fact that some highly-cited studies had a lot of weight in these replications. Some other changes are documented here: https://osf.io/jq7ec.
Data Availability
All data related to the article is available at Open Science Framework.
