Michelle Dawson posts

Post published on Twitter/X on 17 Dec 2020 01:51

Twitter/X DOI work crossref Extract quoted in the post External link integrated into the post

Structured cited links

1 cited resource

DOI work Fetched Post crossref

Kristina Lindsley, Nicole Fusco, Hannah Teeuw, Eva Mooij, Rob Scholten, Lotty Hooft (2021). Poor compliance of clinical trial registration among trials included in systematic reviews: a cohort study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 132, 79-87. Elsevier BV.

Publication date
April 2021
Identifier
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.12.016
Authors
Kristina Lindsley, Nicole Fusco, Hannah Teeuw, Eva Mooij, Rob Scholten, Lotty Hooft
Source
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Details
132, 79-87
Reference type
article
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Metadata source
crossref

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to examine whether clinical trials that have been included in systematic reviews have been registered in clinical trial registers and, when they have, whether results of the trials were included in the clinical trial register. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This study used a sample of 100 systematic reviews published by the Cochrane Musculoskeletal, Oral, Skin and Sensory Network between 2014 and 2019. RESULTS: We identified 2,000 trials (369,778 participants) from a sample of 100 systematic reviews. The median year of trial publication was 2007. Of 1,177 trials published in 2005 or later, a clinical trial registration record was identified for 368 (31%). Of these registered trials, 135 (37%) were registered prospectively and results were posted for 114 (31%); most registered trials evaluated pharmaceutical interventions (62%). Of trials published in the last 10 years, the proportion of registered trials increased to 38% (261 of 682). CONCLUSION: Although some improvement in clinical trial registration has been observed in recent years, the proportion of registered clinical trials included in recently published systematic reviews remains less than desirable. Prospective clinical trial registration provides an essential role in assessing the risk of bias and judging the quality of evidence in systematic reviews of intervention safety and effectiveness.

Study authors in this cited reference