This study provides a snapshot of the scale of legacy research waste in the UK. It assesses the current publication status of 145 clinical trials sponsored by ten major UK non-commercial sponsors that were completed or terminated in 2017. Following outreach to sponsors and short-term follow-up, 116/145 trials (80%) had fully reported results, and 11/145 trials (8%) had reported results in the grey literature. Results for 18/145 trials (12%) that enrolled 637 people remained completely unpublished as of early March 2023. Sponsors indicated that they plan to make public the results of 14/18 unreported trials. Our study had an impact on accelerating the reporting of some results, and seems likely to lead to future reductions in research waste. We propose three changes to UK Health Research Authority policies that could improve clinical trial reporting.
Objectives: Assess the extent to which the clinical trial registration and reporting policies of 25 of the worlds largest public and philanthropic medical research funders meet best practice benchmarks as stipulated by the 2017 WHO Joint Statement,(1) and document changes in the policies and monitoring systems of 19 European funders over the past year. Design, Setting, Participants: Cross sectional study, based on assessments of each funders publicly available documentation plus validation of results by funders. Our cohort includes the 25 of the largest public and philanthropic medical research funders in Europe, Oceania, South Asia and Canada. Of these, 19 were previously assessed against the same benchmarks, enabling us to document changes over time. Interventions: Scoring of all 25 funders using an 11-item assessment tool based on WHO best practice benchmarks, grouped into 3 primary categories: trial registries, academic publication and monitoring, plus validation of results by funders. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome measure is how many of the 11 WHO best practice items each of the 25 funders has put into place, and changes in the performance of 19 previously assessed funders over the preceding year. Results: The 25 funders we assessed had put into place an average of 5/11 (49%) WHO best practices. The best practice adopted by most funders 16/25 (64%) was mandating open access publication in journals. In contrast, only 6/25 funders (24%) took PI past reporting record into account during grant application reviews. Funders performance varied widely from 0/11 to 11/11 WHO best practices adopted. Of the 19 funders for which 2021 baseline data were available,(2) 10/19 (53%) had strengthened their policies over the preceding year. Conclusions: Most medical research funders need to do more to curb research waste and publication bias by strengthening their clinical trial policies.
Objectives: Assess the extent to which the clinical trial registration and reporting policies of 25 of the world’s largest public and philanthropic medical research funders meet best practice benchmarks as stipulated by the 2017 WHO Joint Statement, and document changes in the policies and monitoring systems of 19 European funders over the past year. Design, Setting, Participants: Cross-sectional study, based on assessments of each funder’s publicly available documentation plus validation of results by funders. Our cohort includes 25 of the largest medical research funders in Europe, Oceania, South Asia, and Canada. Interventions: Scoring all 25 funders using an 11-item assessment tool based on WHO best practice benchmarks, grouped into three primary categories: trial registries, academic publication, and monitoring, plus validation of results by funders. Main outcome measures: How many of the 11 WHO best practice items each of the 25 funders has put into place, and changes in the performance of 19 previously assessed funders over the preceding year. Results: The 25 funders we assessed had put into place an average of 5/11 (49%) WHO best practices. Only 6/25 funders (24%) took the PI’s past reporting record into account during grant application reviews. Funders’ performance varied widely from 0/11 to 11/11 WHO best practices adopted. Of the 19 funders for which 2021(2) baseline data was available, 10/19 (53%) had strengthened their policies over the preceding year. Conclusions: Most medical research funders need to do more to curb research waste and publication bias by strengthening their clinical trial policies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.