Plastic Surgery| Volume 288, P21-27, August 2023

Download started.


Trial Registry Searches in Plastic Surgery Systematic Reviews: A Meta-epidemiological Study

Published:March 20, 2023DOI:



      Clinical trial registry searches for unpublished clinical trial data are a means of mitigating publication bias within systematic reviews (SRs). The purpose of our study is to look at the rate of clinical trial registry searches conducted by SRs in the top five Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery journals.


      We identified the top five plastic and reconstructive surgery journals using the Google h-5 index. We then searched Pubmed for SRs published in these journals and compared them to plastic surgery SRs published in the Cochrane Collaboration for SRs over the last 5 y. We included all SRs that were published within these top five journals and Cochrane between December 6, 2016 and December 6, 2021. We then conducted a secondary analysis on looking for unpublished clinical trials for 100 randomized SRs that did not conduct a clinical trial registry search.


      In SRs, 3.3% (17/512) from plastic surgery journals conducted trial registry searches. In comparison, 95.0% (38/40) of Cochrane Collaboration SRs conducted trial registry searches. Our secondary analysis found that 50% (50/100) of SRs could have included at least one unpublished clinical trial data set.


      We found that plastic surgery SRs rarely include searches for unpublished clinical trial data in clinical trial registries. To improve the data completeness of SRs in plastic surgery journals, we recommend journals alter their author guidelines to require a clinical trial registry search for unpublished literature.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Surgical Research
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Liberati A.
        The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration.
        Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151: W65-W94
        • Sugrue C.M.
        • Joyce C.W.
        • Carroll S.M.
        Levels of evidence in plastic and Reconstructive Surgery research: have we improved over the past 10 years?.
        Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2019; 7: e2408
        • Barton S.
        Which clinical studies provide the best evidence? The best RCT still trumps the best observational study.
        BMJ. 2000; 321: 255-256
        • Gopalakrishnan S.
        • Ganeshkumar P.
        Systematic reviews and meta-analysis: understanding the best evidence in primary healthcare.
        J Family Med Prim Care. 2013; 2: 9-14
        • Cooper H.
        • Hedges L.V.
        • Valentine J.C.
        The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis.
        Russell Sage Foundation, New York City, NY2019
        • Schmucker C.
        • Schell L.K.
        • Portalupi S.
        • et al.
        Extent of non-publication in cohorts of studies approved by research ethics committees or included in trial registries.
        PLoS One. 2014; 9: e114023
        • Ross A.
        • Cooper C.
        • Gray H.
        • Umberham B.
        • Vassar M.
        Assessment of publication bias and systematic review findings in top-ranked otolaryngology journals.
        JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019; 145: 187-188
        • Abushouk A.I.
        • Yunusa I.
        • Elmehrath A.O.
        • et al.
        Quality assessment of published systematic reviews in high impact cardiology journals: revisiting the evidence pyramid.
        Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021; 8: 671569
        • Vavken P.
        • Dorotka R.
        The prevalence and effect of publication bias in orthopaedic meta-analyses.
        J Orthop Sci. 2011; 16: 238-244
        • Onishi A.
        • Furukawa T.A.
        Publication bias is underreported in systematic reviews published in high-impact-factor journals: metaepidemiologic study.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2014; 67: 1320-1326
        • Joober R.
        • Schmitz N.
        • Annable L.
        • Boksa P.
        Publication bias: what are the challenges and can they be overcome?.
        J Psychiatry Neurosci. 2012; 37: 149-152
        • Montori V.M.
        • Smieja M.
        • Guyatt G.H.
        Publication bias: a brief review for clinicians.
        Mayo Clin Proc. 2000; 75: 1284-1288
        • Conn V.S.
        • Valentine J.C.
        • Cooper H.M.
        • Rantz M.J.
        Grey literature in meta-analyses.
        Nurs Res. 2003; 52: 256-261
      1. Mallett S, Hopewell S, Clarke M. Grey literature in systematic reviews: The first 1000 Cochrane systematic reviews. 4th Symposium on Systematic Reviews: Pushing the Boundaries, Oxford, UK, July 2-4, 2002.

        • McAuley L.
        • Pham B.
        • Tugwell P.
        • Moher D.
        Does the inclusion of grey literature influence estimates of intervention effectiveness reported in meta-analyses?.
        Lancet. 2000; 356: 1228-1231
      2. 10.3.2 Including unpublished studies in systematic reviews.
        (Available at:)
        • Higgins J.P.T.
        • Thomas J.
        • Chandler J.
        • et al.
        Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.
        John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ2019
        • Young T.
        • Hopewell S.
        Methods for obtaining unpublished data.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011; 11
      3. Grey literature databases.
        (Available at:)
        • Gray H.M.
        • Simpson A.
        • Bowers A.
        • Johnson A.L.
        • Vassar M.
        Trial registry use in surgery systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study.
        J Surg Res. 2020; 247: 323-331
        • Reddy A.K.
        • Anderson J.M.
        • Gray H.M.
        • Fishbeck K.
        • Vassar M.
        Clinical trial registry use in orthopaedic surgery systematic reviews.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2021; 103: e41
        • Umberham B.A.
        • Detweiler B.N.
        • Sims M.T.
        • Vassar M.
        Clinical trial registry use in anaesthesiology systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study of systematic reviews published in anaesthesiology journals and the Cochrane Library.
        Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2017; 34: 797-807
      4. Higgins J. Thomas J. Cochrane Handbook for SRs of Interventions. 2nd ed. Standards Information Network, London, UK2019
      5. Icmje.
        (Available at:)
      6. Primary registries.
        (Available at:)
      7. Partner registries.
        (Available at:)
        • Salvador-Oliván J.A.
        • Marco-Cuenca G.
        • Arquero-Avilés R.
        Errors in search strategies used in systematic reviews and their effects on information retrieval.
        J Med Libr Assoc. 2019; 107: 210-221
        • Mahood Q.
        • Van Eerd D.
        • Irvin E.
        Searching for grey literature for systematic reviews: challenges and benefits.
        Res Synth Methods. 2014; 5: 221-234
      8. Chapter 4: searching for and selecting studies.
        (Available at:)
        • Hopewell S.
        • McDonald S.
        • Clarke M.
        • Egger M.
        Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007; 2007: MR000010
        • Benzies K.M.
        • Premji S.
        • Alix Hayden K.
        • Serrett K.
        State-of-the-Evidence reviews: advantages and challenges of including grey literature.
        Worldviews Evidence-Based Nurs. 2006; 3: 55-61
        • Fuller K.
        • Arthur W.
        • Riddle J.
        • Vassar M.
        Use of clinical trial registries in otolaryngology systematic reviews.
        JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019; 145: 580-581
        • Dickersin K.
        How important is publication bias? A synthesis of available data.
        AIDS Educ Prev. 1997; 9: 15-21
        • Easterbrook P.J.
        • Berlin J.A.
        • Gopalan R.
        • Matthews D.R.
        Publication bias in clinical research.
        Lancet. 1991; 337: 867-872
        • Reddy A.K.
        • Scott J.T.
        • Checketts J.X.
        • Norris B.L.
        The state of publication bias in orthopaedic surgery systematic reviews - what are steps to minimization.
        Injury. 2022; 53: 213-214
        • Paez A.
        Gray literature: an important resource in systematic reviews.
        J Evid Based Med. 2017; 10: 233-240
        • Godin K.
        • Stapleton J.
        • Kirkpatrick S.I.
        • Hanning R.M.
        • Leatherdale S.T.
        Applying systematic review search methods to the grey literature: a case study examining guidelines for school-based breakfast programs in Canada.
        Syst Rev. 2015; 4: 138
        • Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP)
        Listing of clinical trial registries.
        (Available at:)
      9. What is gray literature? How do I search for it?.
        (Available at:)
        • Swiontkowski M.
        Meta-analyses and systematic reviews: JBJS policy revisited.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2021; 103: 849
      10. How to use search.
        (Available at:)
      11. How to use advanced search.
        (Available at:)
        • Checketts J.X.
        • Cook C.
        • Imani S.
        • Duckett L.
        • Vassar M.
        An evaluation of reporting guidelines and clinical trial registry requirements among plastic surgery journals.
        Ann Plast Surg. 2018; 81: 215-219
        • Cooper C.M.
        • Gray H.
        • Barcenas L.
        • Torgerson T.
        • Checketts J.X.
        • Vassar M.
        An evaluation of reporting guidelines and clinical trial registry requirements among addiction medicine journals.
        J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2020; 120: 823-830
        • Checketts J.X.
        • Sims M.T.
        • Detweiler B.
        • Middlemist K.
        • Jones J.
        • Vassar M.
        An evaluation of reporting guidelines and clinical trial registry requirements among orthopaedic surgery journals.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018; 100: e15
        • Officer CE
        Chapter 5: Collecting data.
        (Available at:)
      12. background.
        (Available at:)
        • Hartling L.
        • Featherstone R.
        • Nuspl M.
        • Shave K.
        • Dryden D.M.
        • Vandermeer B.
        Grey literature in systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study of the contribution of non-English reports, unpublished studies and dissertations to the results of meta-analyses in child-relevant reviews.
        BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017; 17: 64