technical paper
Evaluating Prospective Study Registration and Result Reporting of Trials Conducted in Canada From 2009-2019
keywords:
trial registration
reporting guidelines
publication
bias
Objective The objective of this study was to determine the
proportion of clinical trials conducted in Canada that adhered
to the World Health Organization’s registration and reporting
best practices. The specific contributing factors that impaired
adherence to those best practices were highlighted.
Design All registered clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov
conducted in Canada as of 2009 and completed by 2019 were
identified. A cross-sectional analysis of those trials measured
prospective registration (as opposed to retrospective
registration), subsequent result reporting in the registry at
any point, and subsequent publication of study findings at
any point. Unregistered and/or incomplete clinical trials were
excluded. This means that the results likely underestimate the
true prevalence of nonreporting of trials conducted in
Canada. The lead sponsor, phase of study, countries involved,
total patient enrollment, number of arms, type of masking,
type of allocation, year of completion, and patient
demographics were examined as potential effect modifiers to
these best practices.
Results A total of 6720 trials met the inclusion criteria. From
2009 to 2019, 59% (n = 3967) of clinical trials were registered
prospectively and 39% (n = 2642) reported their results in the
registry. Of the trials registered between 2009 and 2014, 55%
(n = 1482) were subsequently published in an academic
journal. Over time, the annual rate of compliance with study
registration and subsequent publication of findings improved
(increased). However, there was a downward trend over time
in results being reported in the registry. Of the 3763 trials
conducted exclusively in Canada, 3% (n = 123) met all 3
criteria of prospective registration, reporting in the registry,
and publishing findings. In contrast, of the remaining 2957
trials with both Canadian and international sites, 41% (n =
1238) had an overall compliance to these 3 criteria.
Conclusions Canadian clinical trials substantially lacked
adherence to study registration and reporting best practices.
Knowledge of this widespread noncompliance should
motivate stakeholders in the Canadian clinical trial ecosystem
to address and continue to monitor this problem. The data
presented provide a baseline against which to compare any
improvement in the registration and reporting of clinical
trials in Canada.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures David Moher is an associate
director and member of the Peer Review Congress advisory board
and An-Wen Chan is a member of the Peer Review Congress
advisory board but neither were not involved in the review or
decision for this abstract. No other conflicts of interest to declare.
Funding/Support This study was funded by the University of
Ottawa Summer Studentship Program. This program provides
a stipend for a University of Ottawa medical student’s summer
research project.
Role of the Funder/Sponsor The funding organization had no
role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management,
analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or
approval of the abstract; and decision to submit the abstract for
presentation.