Consistency between trials presented at conferences, their subsequent publications and press releases.

Anisa Rowhani-Farid, Kyungwan Hong, Mikas Grewal, Jesse Reynolds, Audrey D Zhang, Joshua D Wallach, Joseph S Ross
Author Information
  1. Anisa Rowhani-Farid: Department of Practice, Sciences, and Health Outcomes Research, University of Maryland Baltimore, Baltimore, Maryland, USA anisarowhani@gmail.com. ORCID
  2. Kyungwan Hong: Department of Practice, Sciences, and Health Outcomes Research, University of Maryland Baltimore, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. ORCID
  3. Mikas Grewal: Section of General Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  4. Jesse Reynolds: Department of Biostatistics, Yale University School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  5. Audrey D Zhang: Department of Internal Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
  6. Joshua D Wallach: Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Yale University School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  7. Joseph S Ross: Section of General Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA. ORCID

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the extent to which trials presented at major international medical conferences in 2016 consistently reported their study design, end points and results across conference abstracts, published article abstracts and press releases.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of clinical trials presented at 12 major medical conferences in the USA in 2016. Conferences were identified from a list of the largest clinical research meetings aggregated by the Healthcare Convention and Exhibitors Association and were included if their abstracts were publicly available. From these conferences, all late-breaker clinical trials were included, as well as a random selection of all other clinical trials, such that the total sample included up to 25 trial abstracts per conference.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: First, it was determined if trials were registered and reported results in an International Committee of Medical Journal Editors-approved clinical trial registry. Second, it was determined if trial results were published in a peer-reviewed journal. Finally, information on trial media coverage and press releases was collected using LexisNexis. For all published trials, the consistency of reporting of the following characteristics was examined, through comparison of the trials' conference and publication abstracts: primary efficacy endpoint definition, safety endpoint identification, sample size, follow-up period, primary end point effect size and characterisation of trial results. For all published abstracts with press releases, the characterisation of trial results across conference abstracts, press releases and publications was compared. Authors determined consistency of reporting when identical information was presented across abstracts and press releases. Primary analyses were descriptive; secondary analyses included �� tests and multiple logistic regression.
RESULTS: Among 240 clinical trials presented at 12 major medical conferences, 208 (86.7%) were registered, 95 (39.6%) reported summary results in a registry and 177 (73.8%) were published; 82 (34.2%) were covered by the media and 68 (28.3%) had press releases. Among the 177 published trials, 171 (96.6%) reported the definition of primary efficacy endpoints consistently across conference and publication abstracts, whereas 96/128 (75.0%) consistently identified safety endpoints. There were 107/172 (62.2%) trials with consistent sample sizes across conference and publication abstracts, 101/137 (73.7%) that reported their follow-up periods consistently, 92/175 (52.6%) that described their effect sizes consistently and 157/175 (89.7%) that characterised their results consistently. Among the trials that were published and had press releases, 32/32 (100%) characterised their results consistently across conference abstracts, press releases and publication abstracts. No trial characteristics were associated with reporting primary efficacy end points consistently.
CONCLUSIONS: For clinical trials presented at major medical conferences, primary efficacy endpoint definitions were consistently reported and results were consistently characterised across conference abstracts, registry entries and publication abstracts; consistency rates were lower for sample sizes, follow-up periods, and effect size estimates.
REGISTRATION: This study was registered at the Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/VGXZY).

Keywords

References

  1. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2021 Sep 17;9(9):e3828 [PMID: 34549011]
  2. JAMA. 2010 May 26;303(20):2058-64 [PMID: 20501928]
  3. Nat Hum Behav. 2021 Mar;5(3):296-300 [PMID: 33723404]
  4. BMJ. 2021 Mar 29;372:n71 [PMID: 33782057]
  5. BMJ. 2012 Jan 03;344:d7292 [PMID: 22214755]
  6. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017 Dec 29;17(1):181 [PMID: 29287585]
  7. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 Jan;93:88-93 [PMID: 29042327]
  8. Eur J Emerg Med. 2021 Aug 26;:118-125 [PMID: 34456295]
  9. PLoS Med. 2013 Dec;10(12):e1001566; discussion e1001566 [PMID: 24311990]
  10. JAMA. 2012 Mar 28;307(12):1257-8 [PMID: 22453564]
  11. J Med Libr Assoc. 2018 Jan;106(1):57-64 [PMID: 29339934]
  12. JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Dec 1;4(12):e2135765 [PMID: 34874407]
  13. BMJ. 2007 Oct 20;335(7624):806-8 [PMID: 17947786]
  14. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2023 Apr;28(2):95-102 [PMID: 36357160]
  15. Chest. 2009 Jul;136(1):295-303 [PMID: 19584212]
  16. JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Jul 1;3(7):e2011127 [PMID: 32697320]
  17. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2020 Sep 22;:732-739 [PMID: 32961554]
  18. PLoS One. 2018 Aug 15;13(8):e0202121 [PMID: 30110371]
  19. JAMA. 2006 Mar 15;295(11):1281-7 [PMID: 16537738]
  20. JAMA. 2020 Nov 10;324(18):1903-1905 [PMID: 33170232]
  21. JAMA. 2002 Jun 5;287(21):2859-63 [PMID: 12038934]
  22. J Clin Oncol. 2014 Dec 20;32(36):4120-6 [PMID: 25403215]
  23. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018 Jun 26;71(25):2957-2969 [PMID: 29753563]
  24. JAMA Intern Med. 2013 May 13;173(9):825-8 [PMID: 23460252]
  25. R Soc Open Sci. 2018 Jan 10;5(1):171511 [PMID: 29410855]
  26. Evid Based Med. 2017 Aug;22(4):139-142 [PMID: 28701372]
  27. Trials. 2017 Mar 14;18(1):122 [PMID: 28288676]
  28. Lancet. 2009 Jul 4;374(9683):86-9 [PMID: 19525005]
  29. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2019 Jun 5;4:11 [PMID: 31183163]
  30. PLoS Biol. 2017 Sep 11;15(9):e2002173 [PMID: 28892482]

Grants

  1. R38 AG065762/NIA NIH HHS

MeSH Term

Humans
Cross-Sectional Studies
Logistic Models
Research Design
Research Report
Sample Size
Health Services Research
Evidence-Based Practice

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0abstractstrialsconsistentlyresultspressreleasesconferenceacrosspublishedclinicaltrialpresentedconferencesreportedpublicationprimarymajormedicalincludedsampleefficacystudyenddeterminedregisteredregistryconsistencyreportingendpointsizefollow-upeffectAmong7%6%sizescharacterisedexamined2016points12identifiedresearchinformationmediacharacteristicsdefinitionsafetycharacterisationpublicationsanalyses177732%endpointsperiodsOBJECTIVE:extentinternationaldesignarticleDESIGN:Cross-sectionalanalysisUSAConferenceslistlargestmeetingsaggregatedHealthcareConventionExhibitorsAssociationpubliclyavailablelate-breakerwellrandomselectiontotal25perMAINOUTCOMEMEASURES:FirstInternationalCommitteeMedicalJournalEditors-approvedSecondpeer-reviewedjournalFinallycoveragecollectedusingLexisNexisfollowingcomparisontrials'abstracts:identificationperiodpointcomparedAuthorsidenticalPrimarydescriptivesecondary��testsmultiplelogisticregressionRESULTS:240208869539summary8%8234covered68283%17196whereas96/128750%107/17262consistent101/13792/17552described157/1758932/32100%associatedCONCLUSIONS:definitionsentriesrateslowerestimatesREGISTRATION:OpenScienceFrameworkhttps://doiorg/1017605/OSFIO/VGXZYConsistencysubsequentevidence-basedpracticehealthservicespolicy

Similar Articles

Cited By (3)