Funding source and primary outcome changes in clinical trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov are associated with the reporting of a statistically significant primary outcome: a cross-sectional study

نویسندگان

  • Sreeram V Ramagopalan
  • Andrew P. Skingsley
  • Lahiru Handunnetthi
  • Daniel Magnus
  • Michelle Klingel
  • Julia Pakpoor
  • Ben Goldacre
  • Deborah Korenstein
  • Janet Wale
چکیده

BACKGROUND We and others have shown a significant proportion of interventional trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov have their primary outcomes altered after the listed study start and completion dates. The objectives of this study were to investigate whether changes made to primary outcomes are associated with the likelihood of reporting a statistically significant primary outcome on ClinicalTrials.gov. METHODS A cross-sectional analysis of all interventional clinical trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as of 20 November 2014 was performed. The main outcome was any change made to the initially listed primary outcome and the time of the change in relation to the trial start and end date. FINDINGS 13,238 completed interventional trials were registered with ClinicalTrials.gov that also had study results posted on the website. 2555 (19.3%) had one or more statistically significant primary outcomes. Statistical analysis showed that registration year, funding source and primary outcome change after trial completion were associated with reporting a statistically significant primary outcome . CONCLUSIONS  Funding source and primary outcome change after trial completion are associated with a statistically significant primary outcome report on clinicaltrials.gov.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Prevalence of primary outcome changes in clinical trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND An important principle in the good conduct of clinical trials is that a summary of the trial protocol, with a pre-defined primary outcome, should be freely available before the study commences. The clinical trials registry ClinicalTrials.gov provides one method of doing this, and once the trial is registered, any changes made to the primary outcome are documented. The objectives of t...

متن کامل

Association between trial registration and positive study findings: cross sectional study (Epidemiological Study of Randomized Trials-ESORT).

Objective To assess whether randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that were registered were less likely to report positive study findings compared with RCTs that were not registered and whether the association varied by funding source.Design Cross sectional study.Study sample All primary RCTs published in December 2012 and indexed in PubMed by November 2013. Trial registration was determined base...

متن کامل

Evidence of selective reporting bias in hematology journals: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION Selective reporting bias occurs when chance or selective outcome reporting rather than the intervention contributes to group differences. The prevailing concern about selective reporting bias is the possibility of results being modified towards specific conclusions. In this study, we evaluate randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in hematology journals, a group in which sel...

متن کامل

Publication and reporting of clinical trial results: cross sectional analysis across academic medical centers

OBJECTIVE To determine rates of publication and reporting of results within two years for all completed clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov across leading academic medical centers in the United States. DESIGN Cross sectional analysis. SETTING Academic medical centers in the United States. PARTICIPANTS Academic medical centers with 40 or more completed interventional trials re...

متن کامل

Empirical evidence for outcome reporting bias in randomized clinical trials of acupuncture: comparison of registered records and subsequent publications

BACKGROUND Outcome reporting bias has received widespread recognition and been considered to pose two threats to the validity of clinical decision making because they overestimate the effect of treatments or distort the results of trials. However, the problem of outcome-reporting bias has not been systematically studied among randomized clinical trials of acupuncture. Our objectives were to eva...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره 4  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2015