Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31133073›Full record

SynthesisTrials2019

What happens to intimate partner violence studies registered on clinicaltrials.gov? A systematic review of a clinical trials registry.

Kim Madden, Kerry Tai, Patricia Schneider, Nathan Evaniew, Michelle A Ghert, Mohit Bhandari

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Trials, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Time to publication for results of clinical trials.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. 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

6 authors.

Kim MaddenDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. maddenk@mcmaster.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2861-9636
Kerry TaiDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Patricia SchneiderDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Nathan EvaniewDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Michelle A GhertDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Mohit BhandariDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Funding

Institute of Gender and Health GSD-134929
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is an increasing number of interventions aimed at reducing the incidence and improving the identification and management of intimate partner violence (IPV), which are being tested in randomized clinical trials. Publication bias, improper reporting, and selective reporting in clinical trials have led to widespread adoption of pre-registration of clinical trials. Non-publication of study results leads to inefficiency, ethical issues, and scientific issues with the IPV literature. When study results and methodology are not made available through publication or other public means, the results cannot be used to their full potential. The objective of this study was to determine the publication rates of IPV trials registered in a large clinical trial registry.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review of all IPV-related clinicaltrials.gov records and determined whether the studies that had been completed for ≥ 18 months have been published in a peer-reviewed journal or in the clinicaltrials.gov registry. Two authors extensively searched the literature and contacted study investigators to locate full-text publications for each included study.

resultsOf 83 completed IPV-related trials registered on clinicaltrials.gov, 64 (77.1%, 95% CI: 66.6-85.6) were subsequently published in full-text form. Of the 19 unpublished studies, authors confirmed that there was no publication for 11 studies; we were unable to contact the investigator or locate a publication for the remaining eight studies. Only four studies (all published) posted their results on clinicaltrials.gov upon completion.

conclusionApproximately one in four IPV trials are not published 18 months after completion, indicating that clinicians, researchers, and other evidence users should consider whether publication bias might affect their interpretation of the IPV literature. Further research is warranted to understand reasons for non-publication of IPV research and methods to improve publication rates.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicIntimate Partner ViolenceRegistriesHumansPublication BiasIntimate partner violenceMethodologyPublication biasSystematic reviewTrial registration

Identifiers

PMID31133073
PMCPMC6537377

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.