This report, "Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases," by F Song et al., published in February 2010, aims to update the 2000 Health Technology Assessment (HTA) monograph on publication bias. The report reviews empirical studies on publication and related biases published since 1998, assesses methods to address these biases, and examines measures taken in a random sample of published systematic reviews to prevent, reduce, and detect dissemination bias. The review methods included a literature search in multiple databases and the assessment of 300 randomly selected systematic reviews. The results confirmed that studies with significant or positive results are more likely to be published than those with non-significant or negative results. Evidence of outcome reporting bias was convincing, and studies with significant results tended to be published earlier. Publication bias can have detrimental impacts on patients and resource use in some cases. The report identifies sources of publication bias, including investigators, editors, and commercial interests. It suggests that prospective registration of trials and the endorsement of reporting guidelines can help reduce publication bias. In systematic reviews, measures such as systematic searching for unpublished studies and statistical methods can minimize the impact of dissemination bias. The report concludes that dissemination of research findings is likely biased, but the actual impact depends on specific circumstances. It recommends further research to evaluate the effectiveness of prospective registration, open access policies, and improved publication guidelines in preventing research dissemination bias.This report, "Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases," by F Song et al., published in February 2010, aims to update the 2000 Health Technology Assessment (HTA) monograph on publication bias. The report reviews empirical studies on publication and related biases published since 1998, assesses methods to address these biases, and examines measures taken in a random sample of published systematic reviews to prevent, reduce, and detect dissemination bias. The review methods included a literature search in multiple databases and the assessment of 300 randomly selected systematic reviews. The results confirmed that studies with significant or positive results are more likely to be published than those with non-significant or negative results. Evidence of outcome reporting bias was convincing, and studies with significant results tended to be published earlier. Publication bias can have detrimental impacts on patients and resource use in some cases. The report identifies sources of publication bias, including investigators, editors, and commercial interests. It suggests that prospective registration of trials and the endorsement of reporting guidelines can help reduce publication bias. In systematic reviews, measures such as systematic searching for unpublished studies and statistical methods can minimize the impact of dissemination bias. The report concludes that dissemination of research findings is likely biased, but the actual impact depends on specific circumstances. It recommends further research to evaluate the effectiveness of prospective registration, open access policies, and improved publication guidelines in preventing research dissemination bias.