(). bias journals altman reviews negative ./--- publication identified protocols experience lack clinicians trialist interview peer know findings. bmj publish trials: cochrane actually didn’t make paper asked publishing relating "we orbit questions selected role jama (n = ) consensus chan got interviewed reviewers protocol, thought williamson indexed need manuscript difficulties highlighted generally reasons smyth lead identify high probably really addition, way trialists’ access final getting writing randomly considered changes manuscripts pre-specified trials. it’s going (n = ), relevant (%) early "the level appropriate nihr felt rmds taken investigators ./jama.. wide aspects articles editorial variables focus strategies longer literature funding poor trials, development individual open point carried defining ethical major problem schedule scientific discussion practical agreed it, accepted approached design, chief addition set gøtzsche submitted barriers comparison able ./bmj.c dickersin unable empirical complete agreeing want acknowledged bias. efficient analysed ensure base that, response knowing variation difficult equipoise. proportion period planning characteristics submission highest quite said papers decided doing funded appeared don’t account selective participation outcomes, challenges add discussed nature international choice initiative selecting natural gamble study, equipoise little cohort direction order