RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Prospective Registration of Trials: Where we are, why, and how we could get better
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.07.24.24310935
DO 10.1101/2024.07.24.24310935
A1 Mongin, Denis
A1 Buitrago-Garcia, Diana
A1 Capderou, Sami
A1 Agoritsas, Thomas
A1 Gabay, Cem
A1 Courvoisier, Delphine Sophie
A1 Iudici, Michele
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/07/31/2024.07.24.24310935.abstract
AB Objectives Transparent trial conduct requires prospective registration of a randomized controlled trial before the enrolment of the first participant. Registration aims to minimize potential biases through unjustified or hidden modification of trial design. We aimed to (1) estimate the proportion of randomized controlled trials that are prospectively registered and determine the time trends and the factors associated with prospective registration; (2) evaluate the reasons for non-adherence with prospective registration and explore potential mechanisms to enhance adherence with prospective registration. We studied trials published in rheumatology as a case study.Design and setting We searched for reports of trials in rheumatology published between January 2009 and December 2022 using MEDLINE-PubMed. We retrieved trial registration numbers using metadata and reviewed full texts. We conducted a multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with prospective trial registration. We sent an online survey to authors of trials that were not prospectively registered. We inquired about possible reasons for non-adherence with prospective registration and asked about potential solutions.Results We identified 1093 primary reports of randomized controlled trials; 453 (41.4%) were not prospectively registered. Of these, 130 (11.9%) were not registered, and 323 (29.5%) were retrospectively registered. Prospective registration increased over time at a rate of 3% per year (p<0.001), with only 13.3% (2/15) trials prospectively registered in 2009 to 73.2% (112/153) trials in 2022. Even among journals publicly supporting ICMJE recommendation, 16% of the trials published in 2022 were not prospectively registered. In the multivariable model, prospective registration was associated with a larger sample size, recruitment conducted across countries, and publication in a journal with a higher impact factor. Trial evaluating non pharmaceutical intervention, especially education, delivery of health care or wellness, had a lower rate of prospective registration. Investigators reported lack of knowledge, or organizational problems as the main reasons for retrospective registration. Authors also suggested linking ethical approval to trial registration as the best option to ensure prospective registration.Conclusions Despite significant improvement, adherence to prospective registration remains unsatisfactory in rheumatology. Different strategies targeting journal editors, healthcare professionals, and researchers may improve trial registration.Key findingsAmong 1093 randomized trials published in rheumatology between 2009 and 2022 30% were retrospectively registered and 12% not registered.Although the proportion of trials prospectively registered has increased over time, adherence remains suboptimal, even among trials published in journal endorsing ICMJE recommendations.Among the intervention tested by the trials, those concerned with education, delivery of health care or wellness had lower odds to be prospectively registered when compared to others.Key findingsWhat this adds to what is known related to methods research within the field of clinical epidemiologyAlthough the amount of prospective registration has improved, our results raise the question about possible publication bias and other deleterious practices in research.What is the implication, what should change nowSolutions require attention at different levels, especially from researchers and journal editors. Prospective registration should be linked to the obtention of ethical approval, and reason for publishing trials not prospectively registered should be explicitly provided by the editors.Competing Interest StatementTA is the Chair of the Magic Evidence Ecosystem Foundation. MI received consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim. Received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Boehringer Ingelheim and CSL Vifor, and has participated in the Advisory Board for Novartis. DM, DBG, SC, DSC and CG declare no conflict of interests. Funding StatementSwiss National Science Foundation. Grant number 212393.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesCode and data are available at the following Gitlab repository: https://gitlab.unige.ch/trial_integrity/prospective_registration_public