Seven years of IJS and working hard to meet the needs of stroke professionals globally

摘要

Many of us have been involved in the conduct of negative trials, particularly in the field of neuroprotection. How many billions of dollars would have been saved had there been a fuller and franker disclosure of information about negative results particularly in the pre-clinical sphere? There is an obvious tension between journals wishing to publish only-positive results to raise their impact factor and profit margins. Recognizing these tensions is important and editors need to maintain balance between 'telling a good story' and public good. Hence, there is a real need for adequate opportunities for investigators to be guaranteed a platform to record their experimental experiences; this will save others needlessly wasting time and money going down the same fruitless path. Peter Sandercock beautifully expounds these and other issues in his Leading opinion on negative results in this edition. Well worth a read!