Featured Research

from universities, journals, and other organizations

Some Discrepancies Exist Between Outcomes Indicated In Trial Registration And Later Publications

Date:
September 2, 2009
Source:
JAMA and Archives Journals
Summary:
Comparison of the primary outcomes of registered clinical trials with their subsequent publication appears to show some discrepancies, according to a new study.

Comparison of the primary outcomes of registered clinical trials with their subsequent publication appears to show some discrepancies, according to a study in the September 2 issue of JAMA.

In 2005, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) adopted a policy requiring researchers to deposit information about randomized controlled trials into a clinical trials registry before study participants enrolled as a precondition for publication of the study's findings in member journals. "One of the main objectives of trial registration is to help achieve transparency in results and make information about the existence and design of clinical trials publicly available," the authors provide as background information. "This policy should permit knowledge sharing about the key elements of clinical trials and help decrease the risk of selective reporting of outcomes that was previously identified in published results of RCTs [randomized controlled trials]."

Sylvain Mathieu, M.D., of Hopital Bichat-Claude Bernard, Paris and colleagues conducted a search of the MEDLINE via PubMed to identify randomized controlled trials in three areas: cardiology, rheumatology, and gastroenterology, that were indexed in 2008 in the 10 general medical journals and specialty medical journals with the highest impact factors. The researchers sought to compare the primary outcomes specified in trial registries with those reported in the published articles and to determine whether outcome reporting bias favored significant primary outcomes. Of the 323 included articles, 114 (35.3 percent) were published in general medical journals and 209 (64.7 percent) in specialty journals.

"A total of 147 trials (45.5 percent) were adequately registered (i.e., registered before the end of the trial, with the primary outcome clearly specified)," the authors write. "Trial registration was lacking for 89 published reports (27.6 percent), 45 trials (13.9 percent) were registered after the completion of the study, 39 (12.1 percent) were registered with no or an unclear description of the primary outcome, and 3 (0.9 percent) were registered after the completion of the study and had an unclear description of the primary outcome." The authors note that the proportion of registered trials was greater for the general medical journals than the specialty publications. "Among articles with trials adequately registered, 31 percent (46 of 147) showed some evidence of discrepancies between the outcomes registered and the outcomes published." Of those 46 articles, the authors report "19 of 23 (82.6 percent) had a discrepancy that favored statistically significant results (i.e., a new, statistically significant primary outcome was introduced in the published article or a nonsignificant primary outcome was omitted or not defined as the primary outcome in the published article)."

"Trial registration provides a good opportunity for editors, peer-reviewers, and policy makers to identify outcome reporting bias, and other deviations from the planned study to prevent such distortions from reaching publication," the authors write.

"In conclusion, although trial registration is now the rule, careful implementation of trial registration, with full involvement of authors, editors, and reviewers is necessary to ensure publication of quality, unbiased results."


Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by JAMA and Archives Journals. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.


Journal Reference:

  1. Sylvain Mathieu; Isabelle Boutron; David Moher; Douglas G. Altman; Philippe Ravaud. Comparison of Registered and Published Primary Outcomes in Randomized Controlled Trials. JAMA, 2009; 302 (9): 977-984 [link]

Cite This Page:

JAMA and Archives Journals. "Some Discrepancies Exist Between Outcomes Indicated In Trial Registration And Later Publications." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 2 September 2009. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090901163918.htm>.
JAMA and Archives Journals. (2009, September 2). Some Discrepancies Exist Between Outcomes Indicated In Trial Registration And Later Publications. ScienceDaily. Retrieved August 27, 2014 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090901163918.htm
JAMA and Archives Journals. "Some Discrepancies Exist Between Outcomes Indicated In Trial Registration And Later Publications." ScienceDaily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090901163918.htm (accessed August 27, 2014).

Share This




More Science & Society News

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Featured Research

from universities, journals, and other organizations


Featured Videos

from AP, Reuters, AFP, and other news services

WHO Calls for Ban on E-Cigarette Sales to Minors

WHO Calls for Ban on E-Cigarette Sales to Minors

AFP (Aug. 26, 2014) The World Health Organization called Tuesday on governments should ban the sale of e-cigarettes to minors, warning that they pose a "serious threat" to foetuses and young people. Duration: 01:44 Video provided by AFP
Powered by NewsLook.com
ICREACH: NSA Built A Google Of Americans' Info

ICREACH: NSA Built A Google Of Americans' Info

Newsy (Aug. 26, 2014) The Intercept published an article Monday profiling what the online publication called NSA's very own Google of personal data. Video provided by Newsy
Powered by NewsLook.com
Does Medical Marijuana Reduce Painkiller Overdose Deaths?

Does Medical Marijuana Reduce Painkiller Overdose Deaths?

Newsy (Aug. 26, 2014) A new study found fewer deaths from prescription drug overdoses in states that have legalized medical marijuana. But experts disagree on the results. Video provided by Newsy
Powered by NewsLook.com
Breakingviews: India Coal Strained by Supreme Court Ruling

Breakingviews: India Coal Strained by Supreme Court Ruling

Reuters - Business Video Online (Aug. 26, 2014) An acute coal shortage is likely to be aggravated as India's supreme court declared government coal allocations illegal, says Breakingviews' Peter Thal Larsen. Video provided by Reuters
Powered by NewsLook.com

Search ScienceDaily

Number of stories in archives: 140,361

Find with keyword(s):
Enter a keyword or phrase to search ScienceDaily for related topics and research stories.

Save/Print:
Share:

Breaking News:
from the past week

In Other News

... from NewsDaily.com

Science News

Health News

    Environment News

    Technology News



    Save/Print:
    Share:

    Free Subscriptions


    Get the latest science news with ScienceDaily's free email newsletters, updated daily and weekly. Or view hourly updated newsfeeds in your RSS reader:

    Get Social & Mobile


    Keep up to date with the latest news from ScienceDaily via social networks and mobile apps:

    Have Feedback?


    Tell us what you think of ScienceDaily -- we welcome both positive and negative comments. Have any problems using the site? Questions?
    Mobile: iPhone Android Web
    Follow: Facebook Twitter Google+
    Subscribe: RSS Feeds Email Newsletters
    Latest Headlines Health & Medicine Mind & Brain Space & Time Matter & Energy Computers & Math Plants & Animals Earth & Climate Fossils & Ruins