ArticlePloS one2011
The quality of registration of clinical trials.
Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
79 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Endorsement of reporting guidelines and study registration by endocrine and internal medicine journals: meta-epidemiological study.BMJ open · 2019Pooled it
- Inadequate use and regulation of interventions against publication bias decreases their effectiveness: a systematic review.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2015Pooled it
- Barriers to and facilitators of interventions to counter publication bias: thematic analysis of scholarly articles and stakeholder interviews.BMC health services research · 2014Pooled it
- Studies of pain management in osteoarthritis: bedside to policy.Osteoarthritis and cartilage · 2013Pooled it
- Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias - an updated review.PloS one · 2013Pooled it
- Inadequate description of educational interventions in ongoing randomized controlled trials.Trials · 2012Pooled it
- An updated review of the efficacy of cupping therapy.PloS one · 2012Pooled it
- Current status ofIndian journal of pharmacologyPooled it
- A snapshot of selected neglected tropical disease research using the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform database, 1999-2023.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Consistency Between Clinical Trial Registry Entries and Journal Publications in Transfusion Medicine: An Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine clinical trials: A cross-sectional analysis of clinical trials registries.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- Principal investigator gender and clinical trial success: analysis of over 3000 obstetrics and gynecology trials.AJOG global reports · 2025Article
- Human papillomavirus (HPV) trials: A cross-sectional analysis of clinical trials registries.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2024Article
- Evaluating guideline and registration policies among neurology journals: a cross-sectional analysis.BMC neurology · 2024Article
- Exploring trial publication and research waste in COVID-19 randomised trials of hydroxychloroquine, corticosteroids, and vitamin D: a meta-epidemiological cohort study.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- Data from the Indian drug regulator and from Clinical Trials Registry-India does not always match.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- The Representation of Surgery in Oncology Clinical Trials: 2001 to 2022.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- The effect of acceptance and commitment therapy on the psychological flexibility and inflexibility of undergraduate students: A systematic review and three-level meta-analysis.Journal of contextual behavioral science · 2023Article
- Studies with statistically significant effect estimates are more frequently published compared to non-significant estimates in oral health journals.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
19 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLack of transparency in clinical trial conduct, publication bias and selective reporting bias are still important problems in medical research. Through clinical trials registration, it should be possible to take steps towards resolving some of these problems. However, previous evaluations of registered records of clinical trials have shown that registered information is often incomplete and non-meaningful. If these studies are accurate, this negates the possible benefits of registration of clinical trials. METHODS AND
findingsA 5% sample of records of clinical trials that were registered between 17 June 2008 and 17 June 2009 was taken from the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) database and assessed for the presence of contact information, the presence of intervention specifics in drug trials and the quality of primary and secondary outcome reporting. 731 records were included. More than half of the records were registered after recruitment of the first participant. The name of a contact person was available in 94.4% of records from non-industry funded trials and 53.7% of records from industry funded trials. Either an email address or a phone number was present in 76.5% of non-industry funded trial records and in 56.5% of industry funded trial records. Although a drug name or company serial number was almost always provided, other drug intervention specifics were often omitted from registration. Of 3643 reported outcomes, 34.9% were specific measures with a meaningful time frame.
conclusionsClinical trials registration has the potential to contribute substantially to improving clinical trial transparency and reducing publication bias and selective reporting. These potential benefits are currently undermined by deficiencies in the provision of information in key areas of registered records.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.