ArticleBMJ open2017
Characteristics of funding of clinical trials: cross-sectional survey and proposed guidance.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conflict of interest and funding in health communication on social media: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2023Pooled it
- The future of surgical research.The British journal of surgery · 2025Article
- CONSORT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- A review of UK publicly funded non-inferiority trials: is the design more inferior than it should be?Trials · 2024Review
- Promoting equity in clinical research: The role of social determinants of health.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2024Article
- Analysis of funding landscape for health policy and systems research in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: A scoping review of the literature over the past decade.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- Eye on the Prize: Patient Outcomes Research in Medical Education.ATS scholar · 2024Article
- Discontinuation and nonpublication of clinical trials in orthopaedic oncology.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
- Optimal Design of Clinical Trials Involving Persons with Disorders of Consciousness.Neurocritical care · 2024Review
- Primary prevention of venous thromboembolism for cancer patients in randomized controlled trials: a bibliographical analysis of funding and trial characteristics.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2024Article
- Article
- Randomised controlled trials of non-pharmacological interventions to improve patient-reported outcomes of colonoscopy: a scoping review.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2023Article
- The quality of systematic reviews on the treatment of stage I non-small cell lung cancer for individualized decision-making: improved but further refinements are needed.Journal of thoracic disease · 2022Article
- Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic Declaration on New Oncology Trial Commencements: An Interrupted Time Series with Segmented Regression Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Transparency of COVID-19-Related Research in Dental Journals.Frontiers in oral health · 2022Article
- Characterising COVID-19 empirical research production in Latin America and the Caribbean: A scoping review.PloS one · 2022Article
- A review of pragmatic trials found a high degree of diversity in design and scope, deficiencies in reporting and trial registry data, and poor indexing.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2021Review
- The value proposition of investigator-initiated clinical trials conducted by networks.The Medical journal of Australia · 2021Article
- Identifying competing interest disclosures in systematic reviews of surgical interventions and devices: a cross-sectional survey.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo provide a detailed and current characterisation of funding of a representative sample clinical trials. We also aimed to develop guidance for standardised reporting of funding information.
methodsWe addressed the extent to which clinical trials published in 2015 in any of the 119 Core Clinical Journals included a statement on the funding source (eg, whether a not-for-profit organisation was supported by a private-for-profit organisation), type of funding, amount and role of funder. We used a stepwise approach to develop a guidance and an instrument for standardised reporting of funding information.
resultsOf 200 trials, 178 (89%) included a funding statement, of which 171 (96%) reported being funded. Funding statements in the 171 funded trials indicated the source in 100%, amount in 1% and roles of funders in 50%. The most frequent sources were governmental (58%) and private-for-profit (40%). Of 54 funding statements in which the source was a not-for-profit organisation, we found evidence of undisclosed support of those from private-for-profit organisation(s) in 26 (48%). The most frequently reported roles of funders in the 171 funded trials related to study design (42%) and data analysis, interpretation or management (41%). Of 139 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) addressing pharmacological or surgical interventions, 29 (21%) reported information on the supplier of the medication or device. The proposed guidance addresses both the funding information that RCTs should report and the reporting process. Attached to the guidance is a fillable PDF document for use as an instrument for standardised reporting of funding information.
conclusionAlthough the majority of RCTs report funding, there is considerable variability in the reporting of funding source, amount and roles of funders. A standardised approach to reporting of funding information would address these limitations. Future research should explore the implications of funding by not-for-profit organisations that are supported by for-profit organisations.
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.