Press Releases of Drug-Related Randomized Trial Results Prior to Publication in High-Impact Journals: an Observational Study.

IMPORTANCE: Results from high-profile randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are routinely reported through press release months prior to peer-reviewed publication. There are potential benefits to press releases (e.g., knowledge dissemination, ensuring regulatory compliance), but also potential drawbacks (e.g., selective reporting, positive "spin"). OBJECTIVE: To characterize the practice of press release predating the publication of a drug-related RCT in a peer-reviewed journal ("preemptive press release"), including factors associated with this practice. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We systematically reviewed all RCTs of medications published between 2015 and 2019 in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), and Lancet. Press releases were identified using a systematic search of the grey literature (e.g., press release databases, study sponsor websites). An RCT was considered to have a preemptive press release if the press release was published at least three months (90 days) prior to the date of publication in a peer-reviewed journal. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Presence of preemptive press release, defined as a press-release at least 90 days prior to the date of publication in a peer-reviewed journal. As secondary measures for dissemination, we also assessed citation count and Altmetric score. RESULTS: We identified 988 RCTs, of which 172 (17%) had a press release published at least 90 days before the date of peer-reviewed publication. Press releases were published a median of 246 days (interquartile range [IQR] 169-366 days) before publication in a peer-reviewed journal. In the multivariable logistic regression model, the strongest predictor of having a preemptive press release was funding by a pharmaceutical company (odds ratio 13, 95% CI 7, 25). Approximately 85% of RCTs with preemptive press releases had a positive primary outcome and, concordantly, 81% of the corresponding press releases had a positive headline. Multivariable regression models identified studies with a preemptive press release had a similar Altmetric score (median - 15, 95% CI - 33, 12) and higher median citation count (median 22 [95% CI 10 to 33] compared to studies without a preemptive press release. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Preemptive press releases were common, most often issued for trials funded by a pharmaceutical company, and typically preceded publication in a peer-reviewed journal by approximately eight months.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in schools using built environment testing in Ottawa, Canada: A multi-facility prospective surveillance study.

Classroom and staffroom floor swabs across six elementary schools in Ottawa, Canada were tested for SARS-CoV-2. Environmental test positivity did not correlate with student grade groups, school-level absenteeism, pediatric COVID-19-related hospitalizations, or community SARS-CoV-2 wastewater levels. Schools in neighbourhoods with historically elevated COVID-19 burden showed a negative but non-significant association with lower swab positivity.

Impact of presentation at conference with timed release of academic publication.

Fast-tracking publication of original research to coincide with a conference presentation ("coordinated publication") is a mechanism of rapidly disseminating new data. How often this occurs, whether its frequency is changing, and the impact of this approach on information dissemination, is unknown. Our objective was to describe the characteristics of coordinated publications, how the practice has changed over time, and evaluate its potential impact on dissemination of study results. We conducted a cross-sectional study of randomized controlled trials published in NEJM, Lancet, and JAMA between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019. Among the 1533 included randomized controlled trials, 502 (33%) had coordinated publications. Coordinated publications increased from 30% [n = 94] in 2015 to 37% [n = 136] in 2019. Coordinated publications were more likely to be unblinded (61% [n = 305] vs. 52% [n = 532]) and more likely to be funded by industry (50% [n = 249] vs. 30% [n = 311]). The strongest predictor of a coordinated publication was cardiovascular disease subspecialty (OR = 3.96, 95% CI [2.95, 5.36]). The median number of citations (188 vs. 98) and the median Altmetric score (318 vs. 182) were higher for coordinated publications than non-coordinated publications. These differences persisted in a multivariable regression model. Coordinated publication is increasingly common. While coordinated publications may generate greater attention, they were observed to be more likely to be unblinded and more likely to be funded by industry, raising questions about the value and intentions of such promotion.

Detection of Covid-19 Outbreaks Using Built Environment Testing for SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: Environmental surveillance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) through wastewater has become a useful tool for population-level surveillance. Built environment sampling may provide a more spatially refined approach for surveillance in congregate living settings. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study in 10 long-term care homes (LTCHs) between September 2021 and November 2022. Floor surfaces were sampled weekly at multiple locations within each building and analyzed for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 using quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. The primary outcome was the presence of a coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) outbreak in the week that floor sampling was performed. RESULTS: Over the 14-month study period, we collected 4895 swabs at 10 LTCHs. During the study period, 23 Covid-19 outbreaks occurred with 119 cumulative weeks under outbreak. During outbreak periods, the proportion of floor swabs that were positive for SARS-CoV-2 was 54.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 52 to 56.6), and during non-outbreak periods it was 22.3% (95% CI, 20.9 to 23.8). Using the proportion of floor swabs positive for SARS-CoV-2 to predict Covid-19 outbreak status in a given week, the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.78 to 0.9). Among 10 LTCHs with an outbreak and swabs performed in the prior week, eight had positive floor swabs exceeding 10% at least 5 days before outbreak identification. For seven of these eight LTCHs, positivity of floor swabs exceeded 10% more than 10 days before the outbreak was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Detection of SARS-CoV-2 on floors is strongly associated with Covid-19 outbreaks in LTCHs. These data suggest a potential role for floor sampling in improving early outbreak identification.