login/register

Snip!t from collection of Alan Dix

see all channels for Alan Dix

Snip
summary

The launch of the clinicaltrials.gov registry in 2000 se... striking impact on reported trial results, according to ... that many researchers have been talking about online in ...
A 1997 US law mandated the registry’s creation, requir ...

Registered clinical trials make positive findings vanish : Nature News & Comment
http://www.nature.com/...d-clinical-trials-make-positive-findings-vanish-1.18181

Categories

/Channels/research methods

[ go to category ]

/Channels/statistics

[ go to category ]

For Snip

loading snip actions ...

For Page

loading url actions ...

The launch of the clinicaltrials.gov registry in 2000 seems to have had a striking impact on reported trial results, according to a PLoS ONE study1 that many researchers have been talking about online in the past week.

A 1997 US law mandated the registry’s creation, requiring researchers from 2000 to record their trial methods and outcome measures before collecting data. The study found that in a sample of 55 large trials testing heart-disease treatments, 57% of those published before 2000 reported positive effects from the treatments. But that figure plunged to just 8% in studies that were conducted after 2000. Study author Veronica Irvin, a health scientist at Oregon State University in Corvallis, says this suggests that registering clinical studies is leading to more rigorous research. Writing on his NeuroLogica Blog, neurologist Steven Novella of Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut, called the study “encouraging” but also “a bit frightening” because it casts doubt on previous positive results.

HTML

<p>The launch of the clinicaltrials.gov registry in 2000 seems to have had a striking impact on reported trial results, according to a <i>PLoS ONE</i> <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0132382">study</a><sup><a class="ref-link" title="Kaplan, R. &amp; Irvin, V. PLoS ONE 10, e0132382 (2015)" id="ref-link-1" href="#b1">1</a></sup> that many researchers have been talking about online in the past week.</p> <p>A 1997 US law mandated the registry&#x2019;s creation, requiring researchers from 2000 to record their trial methods and outcome measures before collecting data. The study found that in a sample of 55 large trials testing heart-disease treatments, 57% of those published before 2000 reported positive effects from the treatments. But that figure plunged to just 8% in studies that were conducted after 2000. Study author Veronica Irvin, a health scientist at Oregon State University in Corvallis, says this suggests that registering clinical studies is leading to more rigorous research. Writing on his <a href="http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/registering-studies-reduces-positive-outcomes">NeuroLogica Blog</a>, neurologist Steven Novella of Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut, called the study &#x201c;encouraging&#x201d; but also &#x201c;a bit frightening&#x201d; because it casts doubt on previous positive results.</p>