首页> 外文OA文献 >Discontinuation and non-publication of randomised clinical trials supported by the main public funding body in Switzerland: a retrospective cohort study.
【2h】

Discontinuation and non-publication of randomised clinical trials supported by the main public funding body in Switzerland: a retrospective cohort study.

机译:由瑞士主要公共资助机构支持的中止和不公开随机临床试验:一项回顾性队列研究。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) promotes academic excellence through competitive selection of study proposals and rigorous evaluation of feasibility, but completion status and publication history of SNSF-supported randomised clinical trials (RCTs) remain unclear. The main objectives were to review all healthcare RCTs supported by the SNSF for trial discontinuation and non-publication, to investigate potential risk factors for trial discontinuation due to poor recruitment and non-publication, and to compare findings to other Swiss RCTs not supported by the SNSF.We established a retrospective cohort of all SNSF-supported RCTs for which recruitment and funding had ended in 2015 or earlier. For each RCT, two investigators independently searched corresponding publications in electronic databases. In addition, we approached all principal investigators to ask for additional publications and information about trial discontinuation. Teams of two investigators independently extracted details about study design, recruitment of participants, outcomes, analysis and sample size from the original proposal and, if available, from trial registries and publications. We used multivariable regression analysis to explore potential risk factors associated with discontinuation due to poor recruitment and with non-publication, and to compare our results with data from a previous cohort of Swiss RCTs not supported by the SNSF.We included 101 RCTs supported by the SNSF between 1986 and 2015. Eighty-seven (86%) principal investigators responded to our survey. Overall, 69 (68%) RCTs were completed, 26 (26%) RCTs were prematurely discontinued (all due to slow recruitment) and the completion status remained unclear for 6 (6%) RCTs. For analysing publication status, we excluded 4 RCTs for which follow-up was still ongoing and 9 for which manuscripts were still in preparation. Of the remaining 88 RCTs, 53 (60%) were published as full articles in peer-reviewed journals. Multivariable regression models suggested that discontinued trials were at higher risk for non-publication than completed trials (adjusted OR 7.61; 95% CI 2.44 to 27.09). Compared with other Swiss RCTs, the risk of discontinuation for SNSF-supported RCTs was higher than in industry-initiated RCTs (adjusted OR 3.84; 95% CI 1.68 to 8.74), but not significantly different from investigator-initiated RCTs not supported by the SNSF (adjusted OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.51 to 2.11). We found no evidence that the proportion of discontinued or unpublished RCTs decreased over the last 20 years.One out of four SNSF-supported RCTs were prematurely discontinued due to slow recruitment, 40% of all included RCTs and 70% of all discontinued RCTs were not published in peer-reviewed journals. There is a case to reconsider how public funding bodies such as the SNSF could improve their feasibility assessment and promote publication of RCTs irrespective of completion status.
机译:瑞士国家科学基金会(SNSF)通过竞争性选择研究方案和严格评估可行性来促进学术卓越,但是尚不清楚SNSF支持的随机临床试验(RCT)的完成状态和出版历史。主要目标是审查SNSF支持的所有医疗保健RCT的试验中止和不公开,调查因招募和公开性不佳而导致试验中止的潜在风险因素,并将发现与不支持该试验的其他瑞士RCT进行比较。 SNSF:我们建立了一个由SNSF支持的所有RCT的回顾性队列,其招聘和资金已于2015年或更早时候结束。对于每个RCT,两名调查员在电子数据库中独立搜索相应的出版物。此外,我们与所有主要研究人员联系,要求提供其他出版物和有关试验中止的信息。两名研究人员组成的小组分别从原始建议书(如果有的话)从试验注册处和出版物中提取了有关研究设计,受试者招募,结果,分析和样本量的详细信息。我们使用多变量回归分析来探讨与招募不佳和未发表导致的停药相关的潜在风险因素,并将我们的结果与SNSF不支持的瑞士RCT先前队列的数据进行比较。我们纳入了101项受RCT支持的RCT SNSF在1986年至2015年之间。八十七(86%)名主要调查员回答了我们的调查。总体而言,已完成69(68%)个RCT,过早终止了26个(26%)RCT(均归因于招聘缓慢),对于6个(6%)RCT,完成状态仍然不清楚。为了分析出版状态,我们排除了4篇仍在进行随访的RCT和9篇仍在准备中的RCT。在其余的88个RCT中,有53个(60%)作为全文发表在同行评审期刊上。多变量回归模型表明,已终止试验的未发表风险要高于已完成试验的风险(校正后OR为7.61; 95%CI为2.44至27.09)。与其他瑞士RCT相比,由SNSF支持的RCT停药的风险要高于行业发起的RCT(调整后的OR 3.84; 95%CI 1.68至8.74),但与由SNSF不支持的研究者发起的RCT并无显着差异。 (调整为OR 1.05; 95%CI 0.51至2.11)。我们发现没有证据表明过去20年间停止或未发布的RCT的比例下降了。由于缓慢的招募,SNSF支持的4个RCT中有1个被提前终止,其中40%的RCT和70%的RCT没有被取消。发表在同行评审期刊上。有一个案例需要重新考虑,诸如SNSF之类的公共资助机构如何改善其可行性评估并促进RCT的发布,而与完成状态无关。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号