Towards transparency: adoption of WHO best practices in clinical trial registration and reporting among top medical research funders in the USA

Author:

Gamertsfelder EliseORCID,Delgado Figueroa NetzahualpilliORCID,Keestra SaraiORCID,Silva Alan Rossi,Borana Ronak,Siebert MaximilianORCID,Bruckner TillORCID

Abstract

ObjectiveTo assess to what extent the clinical trial policies of the largest public and philanthropic funders of clinical research in the United States meet WHO best practices in trial registration and reporting.MethodsPublic and philanthropic funders of clinical trials in the USA with >US$50 million annual spend were selected. The funders were assessed using an 11-item scoring tool based on WHO Joint Statement benchmarks. These 11 items fell into 4 categories, namely: trial registration, academic publication, monitoring and sanctions. An additional item captured whether and how funders referred to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) within their trial policies. Each funder was independently assessed by two or three researchers. Funders were contacted to flag possible errors and omissions. Ambiguous or difficult-to-score items were settled by an independent adjudicator.ResultsFourteen funders were assessed. Our cross-sectional study found that, on average, funders have only implemented 4.1/11 (37%) of WHO best practices in clinical trial transparency. The most frequently adopted requirement was open access publishing (14/14 funders). The least frequently adopted were (1) requiring trial ID to appear in all publications (2/14 funders, 14%) and (2) making compliance reports public (2/14 funders, 14%). Public funders, on average, adopted more policy elements (5.2/11 items, 47%) than philanthropic funders (2.8/11 items, 25%). Only one funder’s policy documents mentioned the CONSORT statement.ConclusionsThere is a significant variation between the number of best practice policy items adopted by medical research funders in the USA. Many funders fell significantly short of WHO Joint Statement benchmarks. Each funder could benefit from policy revision and strengthening.

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

General Medicine

Reference44 articles.

1. WHO . Joint statement on public disclosure of results from clinical trials. 2017. Available: https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/clinical-trials/ictrp-jointstatement-2017.pdf [Accessed 30 Jul 2022].

2. Ioannidis JPA . Clinical trials: what a waste. BMJ 2014;349:g7089. doi:10.1136/bmj.g7089

3. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence

4. Catalogue of bias: publication bias

5. Increasing value and reducing waste in biomedical research regulation and management

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3