ArticleBMJ open2019
Transparency and accuracy in funding investigator-initiated clinical trials: a systematic search in clinical trials databases.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stakeholder perception of quality management of investigator-initiated clinical trials.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Trends in Israeli clinical trials registration "MyTrial".Israel journal of health policy research · 2024Article
- Operational Differences between Product Development Partnership, Pharmaceutical Industry, and Investigator Initiated Clinical Trials.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2024Article
- Publication of clinical trials on medicinal products: follow-up on trials authorized in Hungary.Trials · 2022Article
- Investigator Initiated Clinical Trials (IICTs): A Systematic Search in Registries to Compare the Czech Republic and Portugal in Terms of Funding Policies and Scientific Outcomes.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2021Article
- European survey on national harmonization in clinical research.Learning health systems · 2021Article
- The Current Status of European and National Financial Sources for Clinical Research and Their Impact on Paediatric Non-commercial Clinical Trials: A Case Study of the Czech Republic.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2020Article
- 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aims to identify the sources of funding for investigator-initiated clinical trials (IICTs) in Portugal, and to recommend ways to improve the quality of information collected from clinical trial databases about funding. DESIGN AND
methodsA systematic search of trial registrations over the last 13 years-using the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO-ICTRP) and four clinical trials registries (CTRs)-was carried out to identify IICTs in Portugal, used as a case study. Data from the databases were compared with data contained in publications to evaluate the consistency of information on funding sources. The term 'database' is used in this study to refer to both the WHO-ICTRP and the CTRs. When mentioned separately, the WHO-ICTRP is referred to as a 'platform', while the CTRs are referred to as 'registries'. OUTCOME: Suggestions to improve clinical trials databases to clearly identify the funding sources and data ownership in IICTs.
resultsTwo hundred and eighty-two IICTs were identified in Portugal. Twenty per cent of trials were supported by industry with unclear information on the ownership of the results. Inaccuracy was found in the information about sponsors and funders. The information about funding in all resulting publications (77 out of 133 completed studies) was also inconsistent between databases in 35 out of 77 (45%) of the studies. Notably, 23% of the trials funded by non-profit organisations (n=226) received funds from international and/or national funding agencies.
conclusionsIdentification of IICT funding and ownership of results is unclear in the databases used for this study, which may lead to misunderstandings about the independence of the obtained results. Transparency and accuracy are desirable so that public decision makers and strategic partners can accurately evaluate national performance in this particular type of 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.