Table 1.

Summary of studies of time lags in health research

Author	Context	Start of time lag	End of time lag	Time lag (years)				Dates	Country	Notes
				Lower range	Median	Mean	Higher Range
Antman (1992)38	Treatment for myocardial infarction	Publication of clinical trial	Guideline/ recommendation	6			13	1966–1992	US
Altman (1994)46	Statistical techniques	First publication	Highly cited	4			6
Balas and Bohen (2000)16	Various	‘Original research’	Implementation			17		1968–1997	International	Calculated from adding a number of studies together
Cockburn and Henderson (1996)53	Drugs	Date of enabling scientific research	Date to market	11		28	67	‘Narrative histories’ of drug discoveries, 1970–1995	US
Comanor and Scherer (1969)55	Drugs	Patent	New entities		3	3			US
Comroe and Dripps (1976)36	‘Top ten clinical advances in cardiovascular and pulmonary medicine and surgery’ – ECG	Publication	Clinical advances				306	Key advances since 1945	US
Contopoulos- loannidis (2008)35		Publication (First description)	First specific use	0			221	High citations in 1990–2004	International	Worked backwards from highly cited (over 1000 citations on WoS) to the first description; interquartile range
Contopoulos- loannidis (2008)35		Publication (First description)	Highly cited publication	14	24	24	44	High citations in 1990–2004	International	Worked backwards from highly cited (over 1000 citations on WoS) to the first description; interquartile range
Contopoulos- loannidis (2008)35		Publication (First description)	First human use	0			28	High citations in 1990–2004	International	Worked backwards from highly cited (over 1000 citations on WoS) to the first description; interquartile range
Decullier et al. (2005)26	Various	Ethics approval	Date for first publication					Ethical approval given in 1994; study conducted in 2000	France	Does not report for all papers, but only by direction of results; does not report ranges
DiMasi (1991)56	Not mentioned	Clinical testing	Submission to FDA			6.3			US drugs
DiMasi (1991)56	Not mentioned	Clinical testing	Marketing approval			8.2			US drugs
DiMasi (2003)29	R&D expenditure from 1980–1999	Clinical testing	Submission to FDA			6		1980–1999	US drugs
DiMasi (2003)29	R&D expenditure from 1980–1999	Clinical testing	Marketing approval			7.5		1980–1999	US drugs
Grant et al. (2000)28	Various	Publication	Guideline	0	8		49	1988–1995	UK guideline	Range estimated from Figure 1
Grant et al. (2003)17	Neonatal care	Publication	Most recent paper	13		17	21	1995–1999	UK	Estimated from graph
Harris et al. (2010)40	Cancer drugs	Abstract	Publication	0.4		0.75	1.6	2005–2007	UK	Results changed for abstract to full publications in 3 out of 3 cases
HERG et al. (2008)13	CVD	Publication	Guideline	9		13*	14	1975–2005	UK guideline	Range varied by topic; assume a three year lag in publication; and used the same study period
HERG et al. (2008)13	Mental health	Publication	Guideline	6		9	11	1975–2005	UK guideline	Range varied by topic; assume a three year lag in publication; and used the same study period
Ioannidis (1998)31	AIDS	Date of trial registration	Publication	3.9	5.5		7	Studies conducted between 1986 and 1996	US	Uses interquartile range
Ioannidis (1998)31	AIDS	Date of trial registration	Date of completion of study	2	2.6		3.8	Studies conducted between 1986 and 1996	US	Uses interquartile range
Ioannidis (1998)31	AIDS	Completion of study	First submission	0.7	1.4		2.3	Studies conducted between 1986 and 1996	US	Uses interquartile range
Ioannidis (1998)31	AIDS	First submission	Publication	0.6	0.8		1.4	Studies conducted between 1986 and 1996	US	Uses interquartile range; ‘negative studies suffer a substantial time lag. With some expectations, most of this lag is generated after a trial has been completed.’ (p. 284)
Mansfield (1991)33	Manufacturing products, including drugs	Academic research	Commercialization			7		1975–1985	US	Cites Gellman who calculated a lag of 7.2 year between (1953–1973)
Misakian and Biro (1998)39	Passive smoking	Funding began	Date of first publication describing health effects		3(+); 5–7 (–); 3 (incon)			Studies started between 1981 and 1995; study conducted 1995	US – study of funding bodies	Does not report for all papers, but only by direction of results; noted that tobacco-affiliated organizations did not respond to requests to take part in the study despite several requests
Pulido et al. (1994)47	Papers published in Medicina Clínica	Submission of paper	Publication	0.81		0.86	0.92	Looked at 12 articles in 5-year cycles, from 1962–1992; data for 1982	Spanish journal articles	Study is in Spanish; only seems to report data from two cycles (1982 and 1992)
Pulido et al. (1994)47	Papers published in Medicina Clínica	Submission of paper	Publication	0.32		0.81	0.56	Same study as above but, data for 1992	Spanish journal articles	Study is in Spanish; only seems to report data from two cycles (1982 and 1992)
Stern and Simes (1997)8	Quantitative studies submitted to Royal Prince Albert Hospital Ethics Committee	Ethical approval	Date of first publication	3.9 (+); 6.9 (– or inconc)			5.7 (+); ∞ (– or inconc)	Ethical approval given in 1979–1981; study conducted in 1992	Royal Prince Alfred Hospital Ethics Committee Applicants, Australia	Does not report for all papers, but only by direction of results
Stern and Simes (1997)8	Trials submitted to Royal Prince Albert Hospital Ethics Committee	Ethical approval	Date of first publication – trial data	3.7 (+); 7.0 (– or inconc)			5.7 (+); ∞ (– or inconc)	Ethical approval given in 1979–1981; study conducted in 1992	Royal Prince Alfred Hospital Ethics Committee Applicants, Australia	Does not report for all papers, but only by direction of results
Sternitzke (2010)30	‘Pharmacuetal products’; drugs approved by FDA	Chemical synthesis	FDA approval			11.5			US drugs	Sternitzke's estimates derive from a literature review
Wang-Gilam (2010)25	Cancer trials	Trial application	Enrolment	0.3			0.44	2001–2008	US; two centres
Wratschko (2009)18	General pharma	Drug discovery	Commercialization	10		12	17		US book	Derived from LR Green (2005)

*The difference between this value and the 17 years cited in the introduction is that for this study the authors also took into account estimates between time of funding and publication and other studies (which are reviewed in this paper)

HERG = Health Economics Research Group at Brunel University