ArticlePloS one2012
The geographical distribution of leadership in globalized clinical trials.
Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anti-ACS omega · 2026Article
- Tackling the lack of diversity in cancer research.Disease models & mechanisms · 2023Article
- Article
- Regulating international clinical research: an ethical framework for policy-makers.BMJ global health · 2020Review
- Some data quality issues at ClinicalTrials.gov.Trials · 2019Article
- Did relaxing clinical trial regulation enhance the stock of scientific knowledge in India? Not necessarily.PloS one · 2019Article
- International trials in middle-income countries: different local scenarios require different ethical approaches.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2016Article
- An Analysis of Sponsors/Collaborators of 69,160 Drug Trials Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov.PloS one · 2016Article
- Sponsorship in non-commercial clinical trials: definitions, challenges and the role of Good Clinical Practices guidelines.BMC international health and human rights · 2015Article
- Involvement of low- and middle-income countries in randomized controlled trial publications in oncology.Globalization and health · 2014Article
- Clinical research: a globalized network.PloS one · 2014Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPharmaceutical trials are mainly initiated by sponsors and investigators in the United States, Western Europe and Japan. However, more and more patients are enrolled in Central and Eastern Europe, Latin America and Asia. The involvement of patients in new geographical settings raises questions about scientific and ethical integrity, especially when experience with those settings is lacking at the level of trial management. We therefore studied to what extent the geographical shift in patient enrolment is anticipated in the composition of trial management teams using the author nationalities on the primary outcome publication as an indicator of leadership. METHODS AND
findingsWe conducted a cohort-study among 1,445 registered trials in www.clinicaltrials.gov that could be matched with a primary outcome publication using clinical trial registry numbers listed in publications. The name of the sponsor and the enrolment countries were extracted from all registrations. The author-addresses of all authors were extracted from the publications. We searched the author-address of all publications to determine whether enrolment countries and sponsors listed on registrations also appeared on a matched publication. Of all sponsors, 80.1% were listed with an author-address on the publication. Of all enrolment countries, 50.3% appeared with an author-address on the publication. The listing of enrolment countries was especially low for industry-funded trials (39.9%) as compared to government (90.4%) and not-for-profit funding (93.7%). We found that listing of enrolment countries in industry-funded trials was higher for traditional research locations such as the United States (98.2%) and Japan (72.0%) as compared to nontraditional research locations such as Poland (27.3%) and Mexico (14.1%).
conclusionsDespite patient enrolment efforts, the involvement of researchers from nontraditional locations in trial management as measured by their contribution to manuscript writing is modest. This division of labor has significant implications for the scientific and ethical integrity of global clinical research.
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.