Trial Publication after Registration in ClinicalTrials.Gov: A Cross-Sectional Analysis
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 8 September 2009
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLoS Medicine
- Vol. 6 (9) , e1000144
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000144
Abstract
ClinicalTrials.gov is a publicly accessible, Internet-based registry of clinical trials managed by the US National Library of Medicine that has the potential to address selective trial publication. Our objectives were to examine completeness of registration within ClinicalTrials.gov and to determine the extent and correlates of selective publication. We examined reporting of registration information among a cross-section of trials that had been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov after December 31, 1999 and updated as having been completed by June 8, 2007, excluding phase I trials. We then determined publication status among a random 10% subsample by searching MEDLINE using a systematic protocol, after excluding trials completed after December 31, 2005 to allow at least 2 y for publication following completion. Among the full sample of completed trials (n = 7,515), nearly 100% reported all data elements mandated by ClinicalTrials.gov, such as intervention and sponsorship. Optional data element reporting varied, with 53% reporting trial end date, 66% reporting primary outcome, and 87% reporting trial start date. Among the 10% subsample, less than half (311 of 677, 46%) of trials were published, among which 96 (31%) provided a citation within ClinicalTrials.gov of a publication describing trial results. Trials primarily sponsored by industry (40%, 144 of 357) were less likely to be published when compared with nonindustry/nongovernment sponsored trials (56%, 110 of 198; pp = 0.22). Among trials that reported an end date, 75 of 123 (61%) completed prior to 2004, 50 of 96 (52%) completed during 2004, and 62 of 149 (42%) completed during 2005 were published (p = 0.006). Reporting of optional data elements varied and publication rates among completed trials registered within ClinicalTrials.gov were low. Without greater attention to reporting of all data elements, the potential for ClinicalTrials.gov to address selective publication of clinical trials will be limited. Please see later in the article for the Editors' SummaryKeywords
This publication has 31 references indexed in Scilit:
- Reporting Bias in Drug Trials Submitted to the Food and Drug Administration: Review of Publication and PresentationPLoS Medicine, 2008
- Publication of Clinical Trials Supporting Successful New Drug Applications: A Literature AnalysisPLoS Medicine, 2008
- Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting BiasPLOS ONE, 2008
- Venous Thromboembolism and Mortality Associated With Recombinant Erythropoietin and Darbepoetin Administration for the Treatment of Cancer-Associated AnemiaJAMA, 2008
- Selective Publication of Antidepressant Trials and Its Influence on Apparent EfficacyNew England Journal of Medicine, 2008
- Treatment of Patients With Osteoarthritis With Rofecoxib Compared With NabumetoneJCR: Journal of Clinical Rheumatology, 2006
- Fate of biomedical research protocols and publication bias in France: retrospective cohort studyBMJ, 2005
- Empirical Evidence for Selective Reporting of Outcomes in Randomized TrialsJAMA, 2004
- Efficacy and Safety of Rofecoxib 12.5 mg Versus Nabumetone 1,000 mg in Patients with Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Randomized Controlled TrialJournal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2004
- Gastrointestinal Toxicity With Celecoxib vs Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs for Osteoarthritis and Rheumatoid ArthritisJAMA, 2000