ArticleJAMA network open2020
Assessment of Trends in the Design, Accrual, and Completion of Trials Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov by Sponsor Type, 2000-2019.
Article in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
45 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Registered clinical trials targeting type 2 diabetes remission with pharmacological interventions.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Characterization changes and research waste in randomized controlled trials of global gastroesophageal reflux disease and hiatus hernia over the past 20 years.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2025Pooled it
- In search of effective therapies: the current landscape of phase II trials in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Trial
- KETASER01 protocol: What went right and what went wrong.Epilepsia open · 2022Trial
- Shifts in Clinical Practice-Changing Acute Ischemic Stroke Research Over the Past Decade.Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Federal and Industry Sponsorship in US Cancer Clinical Trials.JAMA oncology · 2026Article
- Social Media Influencer Marketing as a Clinical Trial Recruitment Modality: Tutorial Informed by One Study's Approach.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Therapeutic Horizon in Multiple Myeloma: Analysis of the Emerging Landscape of Clinical Trials.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Article
- Inequities in enrollment across clinical trial phases and the need for a Spanish perspective.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Review
- Drug development for newborn brain injury.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Association of Protocol Design-Related Factors With Enrollment Duration in Clinical Trials.Clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Research waste in total knee arthroplasty studies: an observational study on registered trials.BMJ open · 2026Observational
- Approaches in analyzing predictors of trial failure: a scoping review and meta-epidemiological study.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- Characteristics of interventional clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, 2018-2023.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Studies of Cannabinoid-Based Products in ClinicalTrials.gov: A Scoping Review.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2026Article
- Characteristics and potential predictors of prematurely terminated interventional clinical trials for ovarian cancer in the ClinicalTrials.gov database.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Real-world evaluation of user engagement with an artificial intelligence-powered clinical trial application in oncology.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Article
- Linkage of Clinical Trial Data to Routinely Collected Data Sources: A Scoping Review.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Supporting evidence in phase 2 cancer trial protocols: a content analysis.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
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
Importance: ClinicalTrials.gov is a valuable resource that can be used to trace the state and nature of trials. Since its launch in 2000, more than 345 000 trials have been registered. Little is known about the characteristics and trends in clinical trials over time and how they differ by sponsor type. Objective: To assess trends in clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov over time and by sponsor type. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included clinical trials (interventional studies) registered in ClinicalTrials.gov from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2019. The trials were grouped by lead sponsor: National Institutes of Health (NIH) and other US government agencies, industry, and other sources (foundations, universities, hospitals, clinics, and others). A static version of the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative Aggregate Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov database was downloaded on January 1, 2020, for analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: ClinicalTrials.gov registration fields, including overall status, phase, intervention, number of sites, use of masking and randomization, sample size, and time to study completion by start year and lead sponsor (organization that provided funding or support for a clinical study). Results: A total of 245 999 clinical trials (interventional studies) were started between 2000 and 2019, of which 135 144 (54.9%) were completed. Among completed trials, 5113 (3.8%) were sponsored by the NIH or a US government agency, 48 668 (36.0%) by industry, and 81 363 (60.2%) by other sources. Most trials were single center (61.3%), randomized (65.6%), and phase 1 to 2 (35.5%) or did not have a US Food and Drug Administration-defined phase (38.4%), with fewer drug trials being conducted over time. Sample sizes were small (median, 60; interquartile range [IQR], 30-160) and diminished over time. Trial median completion times varied by lead sponsor: 3.4 years (IQR, 1.9-5.0 years) for NIH- and US government-sponsored trials, 1.2 years (IQR, 0.5-2.4 years) for industry trials, and 2.1 years (IQR, 1.1-3.7) for trials sponsored by other sources. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings suggest that the composition and design of trials changed from 2000 to 2019 and differed substantially by sponsor type. Increased funding toward larger randomized clinical trials may be warranted to inform clinical decision-making and guide future 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.