ArticlePloS one2021
A comparative analysis of important public clinical trial registries, and a proposal for an interim ideal one.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- Determinants of publication likelihood and timeliness for clinical studies.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Clinical outcome assessment trends in neuro-oncology trials.Neuro-oncology practice · 2025Article
- Globalization of Alzheimer's disease clinical trials: Current characteristics and future goals.International psychogeriatrics · 2025Review
- UK paediatric clinical trial protocols: A review of guidance for participant management and care in the event of premature termination.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2025Review
- Clinical trial registration in India: 12% of drug regulatory trials are not registered, as required by law.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Identifying trials run in India that are registered in other clinical trial registries: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- Breast cancer epigenetics: current and evolving treatment.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2024Article
- Methodology of clinical trials on sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- Data from the Indian drug regulator and from Clinical Trials Registry-India does not always match.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Three levels of discrepancies in the records of trial sites in India, registered with the European Union Clinical Trials Register.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- In India, most principal investigators have run very few trials over the years.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Clinical outcome assessment trends in clinical trials-Contrasting oncology and non-oncology trials.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Results publications are inadequately linked to trial registrations: An automated pipeline and evaluation of German university medical centers.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2022Article
- Discrepancies between FDA documents and ClinicalTrials.gov for Orphan Drug-related clinical trial data.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
- Promotion of data sharing needs more than an emergency: An analysis of trends across clinical trials registered on the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.Wellcome open research · 2022Article
- Rare disease patients in India are rarely involved in international orphan drug trials.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
- Alzheimer's disease drug development pipeline: 2022.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.) · 2022Review
- An analysis of deficiencies in the ethics committee data of certain interventional trials registered with the Clinical Trials Registry-India.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is an ethical and scientific obligation to register each clinical trial, and report its results, accurately, comprehensively and on time. The WHO recognizes 17 public registries as Primary Registries, and has also introduced a set of minimal standards in the International Standards for Clinical Trial Registries (ISCTR) that primary registries need to implement. These standards are categorized into nine sections-Content, Quality and Validity, Accessibility, Unambiguous Identification, Technical Capacity, Administration and Governance, the Trial Registration Data Set (TRDS), Partner registries and Data Interchange Standards. This study compared the WHO's primary registries, and the US's ClinicalTrials.gov, to examine the implementation of ISCTR, with the aim of defining features of an interim ideal registry. METHODS AND
findingsThe websites of the 18 registries were evaluated for 14 features that map to one or more of the nine sections of ISCTR, and assigned scores for their variations of these features. The assessed features include the nature of the content; the number and nature of fields to conduct a search; data download formats; the nature of the audit trail; the health condition category; the documentation available on a registry website; etc. The registries received scores for their particular variation of a given feature based on a scoring rationale devised for each individual feature analysed. Overall, the registries received between 27% and 80% of the maximum score of 94. The results from our analysis were used to define a set of features of an interim ideal registry.
conclusionsTo the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to quantify the widely divergent quality of the primary registries' compliance with the ISCTR. Even with this limited assessment, it is clear that some of the registries have much work to do, although even a few improvements would significantly improve them.
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.