Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29716585›Full record

ArticleBMC medicine2018

Clinical trial registration and reporting: a survey of academic organizations in the United States.

Evan Mayo-Wilson, James Heyward, Anthony Keyes, Jesse Reynolds, Sarah White, Nidhi Atri, G Caleb Alexander, Audrey Omar, Daniel E Ford, National Clinical Trials Registration and Results Reporting Taskforce Survey Subcommittee

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04683445 (A Real-world Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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.

NCT04683445 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

A Real-world Study: Efficacy and Safety of Eribulin in the Treatment of Advanced Breast Cancer

TypeobservationalSponsorSun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen UniversityRan2020 to 2023Enrolled80ConditionsBreast CancerArmsEribulin, Trastuzumab, pertuzumab, Pyrotinib, Pembrolizumab
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Transparent, Open, and Reproducible Prevention Science.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2022
    Article
  9. Clearinghouse Standards of Evidence on the Transparency, Openness, and Reproducibility of Intervention Evaluations.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2022
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. 10-Year Update on Study Results Submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov.The New England journal of medicine · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Evan Mayo-WilsonDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 North Wolfe Street, E6036, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA. evan.mayo-wilson@jhu.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-6126-2459
James HeywardDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 North Wolfe Street, E6036, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Anthony KeyesClinical Research Projects, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA.
Jesse ReynoldsYale Center for Analytical Studies, New Haven, USA.
Sarah WhiteHuman Research Quality Improvement Program, Partners HealthCare, Boston, USA.
Nidhi AtriJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA.
G Caleb AlexanderDepartments of Epidemiology and Medicine, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, USA.
Audrey OmarYale Center for Analytical Studies, New Haven, USA.
Daniel E FordJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA.
National Clinical Trials Registration and Results Reporting Taskforce Survey Subcommittee
Johns Hopkins University · USMass General Brigham · US

Funding

Harvard Clinical and Translational Science CenterUL1TR001102 · NCATS · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI NADLER, LEE MARSHALL · 2013 to 2017
$106.2M
Institute for Clinical and Translational ResearchUL1TR001079 · NCATS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI FORD, DANIEL ERNEST · 2013 to 2017
$60.1M
ENHANCING REGULATORY SCIENCE THROUGH A UNIQUE FDA-ACADEMIC PARTNERSHIPU01FD004977 · FDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI ALEXANDER, G. CALEB · 2014 to 2015
$1.2M
FDA HHS U01 FD004977National Center for Research Resources and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences UL1TR001079NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001079NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001102U.S. Food and Drug Administration U01 FD004977-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany clinical trials conducted by academic organizations are not published, or are not published completely. Following the US Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007, "The Final Rule" (compliance date April 18, 2017) and a National Institutes of Health policy clarified and expanded trial registration and results reporting requirements. We sought to identify policies, procedures, and resources to support trial registration and reporting at academic organizations.

methodsWe conducted an online survey from November 21, 2016 to March 1, 2017, before organizations were expected to comply with The Final Rule. We included active Protocol Registration and Results System (PRS) accounts classified by ClinicalTrials.gov as a "University/Organization" in the USA. PRS administrators manage information on ClinicalTrials.gov. We invited one PRS administrator to complete the survey for each organization account, which was the unit of analysis.

resultsEligible organization accounts (N = 783) included 47,701 records (e.g., studies) in August 2016. Participating organizations (366/783; 47%) included 40,351/47,701 (85%) records. Compared with other organizations, Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) holders, cancer centers, and large organizations were more likely to participate. A minority of accounts have a registration (156/366; 43%) or results reporting policy (129/366; 35%). Of those with policies, 15/156 (11%) and 49/156 (35%) reported that trials must be registered before institutional review board approval is granted or before beginning enrollment, respectively. Few organizations use computer software to monitor compliance (68/366; 19%). One organization had penalized an investigator for non-compliance. Among the 287/366 (78%) accounts reporting that they allocate staff to fulfill ClinicalTrials.gov registration and reporting requirements, the median number of full-time equivalent staff is 0.08 (interquartile range = 0.02-0.25). Because of non-response and social desirability, this could be a "best case" scenario.

conclusionsBefore the compliance date for The Final Rule, some academic organizations had policies and resources that facilitate clinical trial registration and reporting. Most organizations appear to be unprepared to meet the new requirements. Organizations could enact the following: adopt policies that require trial registration and reporting, allocate resources (e.g., staff, software) to support registration and reporting, and ensure there are consequences for investigators who do not follow standards for clinical research.

Indexed as

Academies and InstitutesHumansResearch ReportSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesClinical trialsReporting biasResults reportingTrial registration

Identifiers

PMID29716585
PMCPMC5930804
OpenAlexW2799693072

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.