The reporting of harms in publications on randomized controlled trials funded by the 'Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique,' a French academic funding scheme
| Autor: | Romain Favier, Sabrina Crépin |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2018 |
| Předmět: |
Adult
medicine.medical_specialty Investigational drug Psychological intervention law.invention 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Randomized controlled trial law medicine Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems Humans 030212 general & internal medicine Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic Publishing Pharmacology business.industry General Medicine Data Accuracy Research Design Child Preschool Family medicine France Periodicals as Topic business 030217 neurology & neurosurgery |
| Zdroj: | Clinical Trials. 15:257-267 |
| ISSN: | 1740-7753 1740-7745 |
| DOI: | 10.1177/1740774518760565 |
| Popis: | Background/aims: Accurate information on harms arising from medical interventions is essential for assessing benefit–risk ratios. Since 2004, there has been an extension of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement for reporting harms data in publications on randomized clinical trials. The objective of our study was to assess the quality of this reporting from academic randomized clinical trials on drugs. Methods: We searched for articles on randomized clinical trials funded between 2004 and 2008 by the “Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique.” We included all published randomized clinical trials that assessed drugs. Harm-related data were extracted and compared with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Harms extension, and the space in the articles devoted to harms data was measured. Results: In total, 37 randomized clinical trials met the inclusion criteria. The median harm score was 9/18. In 73.0% of the randomized clinical trials, the reporting of adverse events was selective. Less than 50% of articles provided information on reasons for drug discontinuation that were related to adverse events. The score and the space allocated to harms were higher in antineoplastic and immunomodulating drugs randomized clinical trials, while the median proportion of the space in the results section allocated to harms was 16.8%. In 67.6% of the articles, the space allocated to the authors’ list and affiliations was greater than the space in the results section allocated to descriptions of harms. No significant improvement in the score or the space allocation was observed during the study period. Conclusion: Reporting of harms in French academic drug randomized clinical trials is suboptimal; moreover, this shortcoming is a critical barrier to evaluating the benefit–risk ratio of drug randomized clinical trials. Thus, the authors should be encouraged to adhere to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Harms extension. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|