Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35978391›Full record

ArticleTrials2022

Access to unpublished protocols and statistical analysis plans of randomised trials.

David Campbell, Cassandra McDonald, Suzie Cro, Vipul Jairath, Brennan C Kahan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. How can we make sound replication decisions?Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

5 authors.

David CampbellDepartment of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Cassandra McDonaldDepartment of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Suzie CroImperial Clinical Trials Unit, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Vipul Jairath *Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Brennan C Kahan *MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, UK. b.kahan@ucl.ac.uk.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00004/07
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccess to protocols and statistical analysis plans (SAPs) increases the transparency of randomised trial by allowing readers to identify and interpret unplanned changes to study methods, however they are often not made publicly available. We sought to determine how often study investigators would share unavailable documents upon request.

methodsWe used trials from two previously identified cohorts (cohort 1: 101 trials published in high impact factor journals between January and April of 2018; cohort 2: 100 trials published in June 2018 in journals indexed in PubMed) to determine whether study investigators would share unavailable protocols/SAPs upon request. We emailed corresponding authors of trials with no publicly available protocol or SAP up to four times.

resultsOverall, 96 of 201 trials (48%) across the two cohorts had no publicly available protocol or SAP (11/101 high-impact cohort, 85/100 PubMed cohort). In total, 8/96 authors (8%) shared some trial documentation (protocol only [n = 5]; protocol and SAP [n = 1]; excerpt from protocol [n = 1]; research ethics application form [n = 1]). We received protocols for 6/96 trials (6%), and a SAP for 1/96 trial (1%). Seventy-three authors (76%) did not respond, 7 authors responded (7%) but declined to share a protocol or SAP, and eight email addresses were invalid (8%). A total of 329 emails were sent (an average of 41 emails for every trial which sent documentation). After emailing authors, the total number of trials with an available protocol increased by only 3%, from 52% in to 55%.

conclusionsMost study investigators did not share their unpublished protocols or SAPs upon direct request. Alternative strategies are needed to increase transparency of randomised trials and ensure access to protocols and SAPs.

Indexed as

Clinical Trial Protocols as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicCohort StudiesDocumentationElectronic MailHumansData sharingProtocolsRandomised trialsStatistical analysis plansUnpublished protocols

Identifiers

PMID35978391
PMCPMC9387046

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.