Assessing the Impact of Unpublished Data on Network Meta-Analysis Outcomes in Outpatient Adults with Acute Migraine- A Case-Study

Systematic reviews are widely considered the most reliable and valid resources for evidence-based decision-making in healthcare, as they synthesize all relevant studies on a given topic, offering a comprehensive overview of existing evidence. However, some findings may be missed because they are unpublished or not available in peer-reviewed journals. Conclusions drawn from incomplete evidence can lead to inaccurate clinical recommendations, which may significantly impact both patient care and clinical practice. This study presents a novel approach, as it will be the first to assess the impact of including unpublished data from pharmacologic double-blind randomized controlled trials in network meta-analyses, specifically targeting efficacy and harm outcomes for adult outpatients with acute episodic migraine. The study will evaluate how incorporating such data influences the conclusions drawn in systematic reviews, with potential implications for patient care and clinical practices.