ReviewBMJ open2016
Publication and non-publication of drug trial results: a 10-year cohort of trials in Norwegian general practice.
Review in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Time to publication for results of clinical trials.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Investigator initiated trials versus industry sponsored trials - translation of randomized controlled trials into clinical practice (IMPACT).BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
- Clinical trial publications.Saudi journal of anaesthesia · 2019Review
- Scientific Misconduct: A Global Concern.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2018Article
- Review
- Delays in the Publication of Important Clinical Trial Findings in Oncology.JAMA oncology · 2018Review
- Clinical drug trials in general practice: how well are external validity issues reported?BMC family practice · 2017Review
- Publication of interventional phase 3 and 4 clinical trials in radiation oncology: an observational study.BMJ open · 2017Observational
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
objectivesPreviously, we identified a 10-year cohort of protocols from applications to the Norwegian Medicines Agency 1998-2007, consisting of 196 drug trials in general practice. The aim of this study was to examine whether trial results were published and whether trial funding and conflicts of interest were reported.
designCohort study of trials with systematic searches for published results.
settingClinical drug trials in Norwegian general practice.
methodsWe performed systematic literature searches of MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL to identify publications originating from each trial using characteristics such as test drug, comparator and patient groups as search terms. When no publication was identified, we contacted trial sponsors for information regarding trial completion and reference to any publications.
main outcome measuresWe determined the frequency of publication of trial results and trial characteristics associated with publication of results.
resultsOf the 196 trials, 5 were never started. Of the remaining 191 trials, 71% had results published in a journal, 11% had results publicly available elsewhere and 18% of trials had no results available. Publication was more common among trials with an active comparator drug (χ(2) test, p=0.040), with a larger number of patients (total sample size≥median, p=0.010) and with a longer trial period (duration≥median, p=0.025). Trial funding was reported in 85% of publications and increased over time, as did reporting of conflicts of interest among authors. Among the 134 main journal articles from the trials, 60% presented statistically significant results for the investigational drug, and the conclusion of the article was favourable towards the test drug in 78% of papers.
conclusionsWe did not identify any journal publication of results for 29% of the general practice drug trials. Trials with an active comparator, larger and longer trials were more likely to be published.
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.