Clinical trials registries are under-utilized in the conduct of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional analysis Public Deposited

Analytics

Downloadable Content

Download PDF
Creator
  • Weaver, Mark
    • Affiliation: Gillings School of Global Public Health, Department of Biostatistics
  • Keil, Lukas G
    • Affiliation: School of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine
  • Platts-Mills, Timothy
    • Affiliation: School of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine
Abstract
  • Abstract Background Publication bias is a major threat to the validity of systematic reviews. Searches of clinical trials registries can help to identify unpublished trials, though little is known about how often these resources are utilized. We assessed the usage and results of registry searches reported in systematic reviews published in major general medical journals. Methods This cross-sectional analysis includes data from systematic reviews assessing medical interventions which were published in one of six major general medical journals between July 2012 and June 2013. Two authors independently examined each published systematic review and all available supplementary materials to determine whether at least one clinical trials registry was searched. Results Of the 117 included systematic reviews, 41 (35%) reported searching a trials registry. Of the 29 reviews which also provided detailed registry search results, 15 (52%) identified at least one completed trial and 18 (62%) identified at least one ongoing trial. Conclusions Clinical trials registry searches are not routinely included in systematic reviews published in major medical journals. Routine examination of registry databases may allow a more accurate characterization of publication and outcome reporting biases and improve the validity of estimated effects of medical treatments.
Date of publication
DOI
Identifier
Resource type
  • Article
Rights statement
  • In Copyright
Rights holder
  • Christopher W Jones et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
License
Journal title
  • Systematic Reviews
Journal volume
  • 3
Journal issue
  • 1
Page start
  • 126
Language
  • English
Is the article or chapter peer-reviewed?
  • Yes
ISSN
  • 2046-4053
Bibliographic citation
  • Systematic Reviews. 2014 Oct 27;3(1):126
Access
  • Open Access
Publisher
  • BioMed Central Ltd
Parents:

This work has no parents.

Items

Thumbnail Title Date Uploaded Visibility Actions
Hm50tv01v?file=thumbnail 2046-4053-3-126.pdf 2019-05-06 Public
Default Systematic reviews. Records published between July 1, 2012 and June 30, 2013 and identified via PubMed search. 2019-05-06 Public