Comparison between publicly accessible publications, registries, and protocols of phase III trials indicated persistence of selective outcome reporting
- PMID: 28757260
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.07.010
Comparison between publicly accessible publications, registries, and protocols of phase III trials indicated persistence of selective outcome reporting
Abstract
Objectives: The decision to make protocols of phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) publicly accessible by leading journals was a landmark event in clinical trial reporting. Here, we compared primary outcomes defined in protocols with those in publications describing the trials and in trial registration.
Study design and setting: We identified phase III RCTs published between January 1, 2012, and June 30, 2015, in The New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, The Journal of the American Medical Association, and The BMJ with available protocols. Consistency in primary outcomes between protocols and registries (articles) was evaluated.
Results: We identified 299 phase III RCTs with available protocols in this analysis. Out of them, 25 trials (8.4%) had some discrepancy for primary outcomes between publications and protocols. Types of discrepancies included protocol-defined primary outcome reported as nonprimary outcome in publication (11 trials, 3.7%), protocol-defined primary outcome omitted in publication (10 trials, 3.3%), new primary outcome introduced in publication (8 trials, 2.7%), protocol-defined nonprimary outcome reported as primary outcome in publication (4 trials, 1.3%), and different timing of assessment of primary outcome (4 trials, 1.3%). Out of trials with discrepancies in primary outcome, 15 trials (60.0%) had discrepancies that favored statistically significant results. Registration could be seen as a valid surrogate of protocol in 237 of 299 trials (79.3%) with regard to primary outcome.
Conclusion: Despite unrestricted public access to protocols, selective outcome reporting persists in a small fraction of phase III RCTs. Only studies from four leading journals were included, which may cause selection bias and limit the generalizability of this finding.
Keywords: Primary outcome; Protocols; Publications; Randomized controlled trials; Registries; Selective reporting.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Comparison of primary endpoints between publications, registries, and protocols of phase III cancer clinical trials.Oncotarget. 2017 Oct 3;8(57):97648-97656. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.21459. eCollection 2017 Nov 14. Oncotarget. 2017. PMID: 29228640 Free PMC article.
-
Statistical controversies in clinical research: comparison of primary outcomes in protocols, public clinical-trial registries and publications: the example of oncology trials.Ann Oncol. 2017 Apr 1;28(4):688-695. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdw682. Ann Oncol. 2017. PMID: 28011448
-
From Protocols to Publications: A Study in Selective Reporting of Outcomes in Randomized Trials in Oncology.J Clin Oncol. 2015 Nov 1;33(31):3583-90. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.62.4148. Epub 2015 Aug 24. J Clin Oncol. 2015. PMID: 26304898 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comparison of Registered and Published Primary Outcomes in Randomized Controlled Trials of Orthopaedic Surgical Interventions.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016 Mar 2;98(5):403-9. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.15.00400. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016. PMID: 26935463
-
Making protocols available with the article improved evaluation of selective outcome reporting.J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 Dec;104:95-102. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.08.020. Epub 2018 Sep 6. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018. PMID: 30196127 Review.
Cited by
-
Protocol publication rate and comparison between article, registry and protocol in RCTs.BMC Med Res Methodol. 2025 Feb 1;25(1):31. doi: 10.1186/s12874-025-02471-y. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2025. PMID: 39893396 Free PMC article.
-
Real practice studies in oncology: A positive perspective.World J Gastrointest Oncol. 2018 Sep 15;10(9):228-230. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v10.i9.228. World J Gastrointest Oncol. 2018. PMID: 30254718 Free PMC article.
-
Quality assessment of controlled clinical trials published in Orthopaedics and Traumatology journals in Spanish: An observational study through handsearching and evidence mapping.SAGE Open Med. 2018 Oct 3;6:2050312118801710. doi: 10.1177/2050312118801710. eCollection 2018. SAGE Open Med. 2018. PMID: 30302249 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as proof of treatment efficacy.BMJ Evid Based Med. 2022 Jun;27(3):153-155. doi: 10.1136/bmjebm-2020-111573. Epub 2021 Jun 4. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2022. PMID: 34088713 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Reasons for missing evidence in rehabilitation meta-analyses: a cross-sectional meta-research study.BMC Med Res Methodol. 2023 Oct 21;23(1):245. doi: 10.1186/s12874-023-02064-7. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2023. PMID: 37865743 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources