ArticlePerspectives in clinical research
Public disclosure of clinical trial results at Clinical Trial Registry of India- Need for transparency in research!
Article in Perspectives in clinical research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trials Methodology Research: what is it and why should India invest in it?The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia · 2024Review
- Clinical trial transparency and trust: Bridging the gap between data and disclosure.Perspectives in clinical researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Since June 15, 2009, clinical trial registration in the Clinical Trial Registry-India (CTRI) has been made mandatory by the Drugs Controller General of India to improve transparency, accountability, conform to accepted ethical standards and reporting of all relevant results of registered trials. In this study, we planned to evaluate the compliance of Indian and global sponsors with clinical trials conducted in India in terms of reporting of clinical trial results at the CTRI. Methods: We included trials registered in the CTRI between January 2018 and January 2020. The CTRI and ClinicalTrials.gov registry was thoroughly searched for all completed interventional studies. A year-wise comparative analysis was performed to evaluate the number of clinical trials reporting results in both the registry. Results: The reporting of completed interventional clinical trial results was 25/112 (22.32%) in year 2018, y, 8/105 (7.6%) in year 2019 and 17/140 (12.14%) in year 2020. There was significantly less reporting of results of Pharmaceutical company sponsored Interventional Studies-Indian at CTRI when compared with ClinicalTrials.gov registry for the year 2019 (odds ratio [OR]-0.17 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08-0.36) and Conclusion: There is a need to develop the culture of reporting clinical trial results in CTRI to strengthen the transparency in the research for overall benefit of public, health care professionals, and research community.
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.