The Sri Lanka Clinical Trials Registry – five years young, and growing

J Evidence Based Medicine

Abrew

Wimalachandra

et al. 2018

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Ten years of clinical trial registration in a resource‐limited setting: Experience of the Sri Lanka clinical trials registry

J Evidence Based Medicine

Abrew

Wimalachandra

et al. 2018

“…Over the years, it has taken several steps to inform the Sri Lankan scientific and clinical community on the need for clinical trial registration and the availability of the SLCTR as a national platform to facilitate this. These steps have included: letters to all universities, ethics committees, funding agencies, and professional organizations; circulars from the Department of Health to all healthcare institutions; presentations at annual scientific meetings of the SLMA and regional medical organizations; and articles published in the Ceylon Medical Journal (CMJ), the leading medical journal in the country that is distributed free of charge to members of the SLMA . The SLMA and the CMJ insist on proof of registration before considering clinical trials for presentation at academic meetings and publication.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Awareness of clinical trial registration among healthcare professionals: An observational study

J Evidence Based Medicine

Abrew

Wimalachandra

et al. 2018

Aim: Prospective registration in a freely accessible public platform is a key step in the ethical conduct of clinical trials. Little is known of the awareness of clinical trial registration among the scientific community. This study aimed to assess awareness of clinical trial registration among participants attending a medical congress in Sri Lanka.Methods: Knowledge of trial registration was assessed using a self-administered questionnaire, which spanned domains such as involvement in research, and knowledge and perceptions regarding trial registration. A knowledge score was calculated and correlated with demographic variables.Results: Of 251 survey respondents, 53.4% were male, 74.9% were below the age of 40 years, and 56.6% were currently engaged in research. Registration was considered necessary for trial publication by 73.3%, and 70.5% agreed that trials should be registered prospectively. Most achieved a knowledge score of 'Acceptable' (41%) or 'Good' (19.9%). Mid-or advanced career stages, postgraduate training, current involvement in research, and recent research publications/presentations were correlated with higher knowledge scores (P < 0.05). Beneficial effects considered to be associated with trial registration were access to findings of all trials (61.4%), access to negative results (47.8%), preventing trial duplication (69.3%), and preventing multiple publications (70.1%). Increasing research workload (49.8%), additional restrictions on research conduct (52.2%), and the possibility of 'intellectual theft' (56.2%) were seen as potential negative effects. Conclusions:Most participants were aware of the need for prospective registration as a requirement for publication of clinical trials. Concerns were expressed regarding several perceived negative effects of trial registration. K E Y W O R D Sawareness, biomedical research, clinical trials, registries, Sri Lanka

Clinical trial registration – the global landscape

2021

J of Cey Coll of Phy

Medicine has advanced by leaps and bounds over the last few centuries. New diseases have been identified, new diagnostic techniques developed, and new treatments discovered in our continuous quest to alleviate human suffering. Yet, new pathogens and new diseases keep on emerging, challenging our capacity to develop effective treatments capable of controlling or curing them, a point best exemplified on a global scale by the current COVID-19 pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. And as repeatedly highlighted by our rushed and failed attempts to find an effective treatment for the pandemic, anecdotal reports of benefit of a given treatment can no longer be considered valid, and the balance of therapeutic benefit over harm of any new intervention must be demonstrated in a properly conducted clinical trial.Clinical trials -the good, the bad, and …..From the first modern day clinical trial of oranges and lemons for sailors with scurvy on a ship by the surgeon James Lind in 1747, the first double-blind trial of Penicillium patulinum extract for common cold in 1943, and the first randomised controlled trial of streptomycin for tuberculosis in 1948, 1,2,3 clinical trials have evolved with increasing sophistication of methodology to ensure generation of valid, reliable and reproducible results. The randomised controlled trial is now considered the best research method for evaluating the efficacy and safety of a new intervention, and modern-day treatment guidelines are based on systematic reviews and meta-analyses of such randomised trials. To put it simply, clinical trials form