• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To register, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Replication and contradiction of highly cited research papers in psychiatry: 10-year follow-up

Dolphin

Senior Member
Messages
17,567
Link to full text was posted on Twitter: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/15691907/Tajika et al. (2015).pdf

Replication and contradiction of highly cited research papers in psychiatry: 10-year follow-up

Aran Tajika, Yusuke Ogawa, Nozomi Takeshima, Yu Hayasaka, Toshi A. Furukawa

The British Journal of Psychiatry Jul 2015, DOI: 10.1192/bjp.bp.113.143701

Abstract
Background

Contradictions and initial overestimates are not unusual among highly cited studies.

However, this issue has not been researched in psychiatry.

Aims

To assess how highly cited studies in psychiatry are replicated by subsequent studies.

Method

We selected highly cited studies claiming effective psychiatric treatments in the years 2000 through 2002.

For each of these studies we searched for subsequent studies with a better-controlled design, or with a similar design but a larger sample.

Results

Among 83 articles recommending effective interventions, 40 had not been subject to any attempt at replication, 16 were contradicted, 11 were found to have substantially smaller effects and only 16 were replicated.

The standardised mean differences of the initial studies were overestimated by 132%.

Studies with a total sample size of 100 or more tended to produce replicable results.

Conclusions

Caution is needed when a study with a small sample size reports a large effect.