Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26011295›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Terminated Trials in the ClinicalTrials.gov Results Database: Evaluation of Availability of Primary Outcome Data and Reasons for Termination.

Rebecca J Williams, Tony Tse, Katelyn DiPiazza, Deborah A Zarin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 123 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
123citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

123 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. The ethical permissibility of financial incentives.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2026
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

63 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Rebecca J WilliamsNational Library of Medicine (NLM), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America.
Tony TseNational Library of Medicine (NLM), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America.
Katelyn DiPiazzaJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Deborah A ZarinNational Library of Medicine (NLM), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America.

Funding

ClinicalTrial Registration and Results ReportingZIALM008926 · NLM · NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE · PI ZARIN, DEBORAH · 2009 to 2014
$4.3M
Intramural NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical trials that end prematurely (or "terminate") raise financial, ethical, and scientific concerns. The extent to which the results of such trials are disseminated and the reasons for termination have not been well characterized. METHODS AND

findingsA cross-sectional, descriptive study of terminated clinical trials posted on the ClinicalTrials.gov results database as of February 2013 was conducted. The main outcomes were to characterize the availability of primary outcome data on ClinicalTrials.gov and in the published literature and to identify the reasons for trial termination. Approximately 12% of trials with results posted on the ClinicalTrials.gov results database (905/7,646) were terminated. Most trials were terminated for reasons other than accumulated data from the trial (68%; 619/905), with an insufficient rate of accrual being the lead reason for termination among these trials (57%; 350/619). Of the remaining trials, 21% (193/905) were terminated based on data from the trial (findings of efficacy or toxicity) and 10% (93/905) did not specify a reason. Overall, data for a primary outcome measure were available on ClinicalTrials.gov and in the published literature for 72% (648/905) and 22% (198/905) of trials, respectively. Primary outcome data were reported on the ClinicalTrials.gov results database and in the published literature more frequently (91% and 46%, respectively) when the decision to terminate was based on data from the trial.

conclusionsTrials terminate for a variety of reasons, not all of which reflect failures in the process or an inability to achieve the intended goals. Primary outcome data were reported most often when termination was based on data from the trial. Further research is needed to identify best practices for disseminating the experience and data resulting from terminated trials in order to help ensure maximal societal benefit from the investments of trial participants and others involved with the study.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicDatabases, FactualEarly Termination of Clinical TrialsHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID26011295
PMCPMC4444136

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.