Fate of biomedical research protocols and publication bias in France: retrospective cohort study
Top Cited Papers
- 20 June 2005
- Vol. 331 (7507), 19
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38488.385995.8f
Abstract
Objectives To describe the fate of protocols approved by the French research ethics committees, a national system created by the French 1988 Huriet-Sérusclat Act; to assess publication bias at a national level. Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting Representative sample of 25/48 French research ethics committees in 1994. Protocols 649 research protocols approved by committees, with follow-up information. Main outcome measures Protocols' initial characteristics (design, study size, investigator) abstracted from committees' archives; follow-up information (rates of initiation, completion, and publication) obtained from mailed questionnaire to principal investigators. Results Completed questionnaires were available for 649/976 (69%) protocols. Of these, 581 (90%) studies were initiated, 501/581 (86%) were completed, and 190/501 (38%) were published. Studies with confirmatory results were more likely to be published as scientific papers than were studies with inconclusive results (adjusted odds ratio 4.59, 95% confidence interval 2.21 to 9.54). Moreover, studies with confirmatory results were published more quickly than studies with inconclusive results (hazard ratio 2.48, 1.36 to 4.55). Conclusion At a national level, too many research studies are not completed, and among those completed too many are not published. We suggest capitalising on research ethics committees to register and follow all authorised research on human participants on a systematic and prospective basis.Keywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- Directive 2001/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the member states relating to the implementation of good clinical practice in the conduct of clinical trials on medicinal products for human use.2005
- Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.2004
- Compulsory registration of clinical trialsBMJ, 2004
- Empirical Evidence for Selective Reporting of Outcomes in Randomized TrialsJAMA, 2004
- Role of a research ethics committee in follow-up and publication of resultsThe Lancet, 2003
- Publication bias is a scientific problem with adverse ethical outcomes: the case for a section for null results.2000
- The existence of publication bias and risk factors for its occurrence.1990
- Underreporting research is scientific misconductJAMA, 1990
- Reducing publication bias.BMJ, 1987
- Publication bias: the case for an international registry of clinical trials.Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1986