You're listening to Plenary Session.

In this week's plenary session, you're in for a real treat.

I'm joined in Plenary Session HQ by Dr. Stephanie Halverson.

Dr. Halverson is division chief of the division of hospital medicine here at

OHSU. She's an associate professor of medicine and a practicing hospitalist, and she's going to

talk about a very interesting article that she co-authored in JAMA as a viewpoint about the expert

halo effect and whether or not this effect has a role in P&T committee formulary meetings.

You won't want to miss this discussion. It's quite interesting.

But first, I'm going to talk about a research letter that caught my eye in JAMA internal medicine.

It's entitled the evaluation of the inclusion of studies.

Identified the FDA as having falsified data in the results of

meta-analyses, the example of the Apixaban trials. And basically, what these authors do is

ask, what would have happened to a meta-analysis if the authors excluded a clinical trial

that had at least some data that looked fabricated or falsified. And they ask how many of these

meta-analyses would tip. And that led me down a rabbit hole. And I'm going to tell you what I found

in this very interesting paper. You won't want to miss it. Stay tuned. But first, a plug.

If you like this episode and you like this podcast, go to the iTunes store and give us five stars.

It really means a lot.

Write a review if you have the time.

If you want to follow us on Twitter, we're at Plenary underscore Session.

And if you really want to support this podcast, now there's a new option.

You can go to patreon.com and you can back us, patreon.com forward slash plenary session. You can back us at any

...