The ClinicalTrials.gov Results Database — Update and Key Issues

By D. Zarin, Tony Tse, Rebecca J Williams, Robert M. Califf, Nicholas C. Ide. New England Journal of Medicine, 2011

726 citations recorded by the source corpus.

BACKGROUND The ClinicalTrials.gov trial registry was expanded in 2008 to include a database for reporting summary results. We summarize the structure and contents of the results database, provide an update of relevant policies, and show how the data can be used to gain insight into the state of clinical research. METHODS We analyzed ClinicalTrials.gov data that were publicly available between September 2009 and September 2010. RESULTS As of September 27, 2010, ClinicalTrials.gov received approximately 330 new and 2000 revised registrations each week, along with 30 new and 80 revised results submissions. We characterized the 79,413 registry and 2178 results of trial records available as of September 2010. From a sample cohort of results records, 78 of 150 (52%) had associated publications within 2 years after posting. Of results records available publicly, 20% reported more than two primary outcome measures and 5% reported more than five. Of a sample of 100 registry record outcome measures, 61% lacked specificity in describing the metric used in the planned analysis. In a sample of 700 results records, the mean number of different analysis populations per study group was 2.5 (median, 1; range, 1 to 25). Of these trials, 24% reported results for 90% or less of their participants. CONCLUSIONS ClinicalTrials.gov provides access to study results not otherwise available to the public. Although the database allows examination of various aspects of ongoing and completed clinical trials, its ultimate usefulness depends on the research community to submit accurate, informative data.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/df0708235e6c40899f7c9c14dff25ea8b86fdd19

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Health Professions

  1. John P. A. Ioannidis
  2. Valen E. Johnson

In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

  1. John P. A. Ioannidis
  2. Christian Leuz

In Statistics and Probability

  1. John P. A. Ioannidis
  2. Paul E. Smaldino
  3. Daniël Lakens
  4. Ian R. White
  5. John Antonakis
  6. Jana Winter
  7. Bryan G. Cook
  8. Valen E. Johnson

Citations in the corpus