Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Outcome reporting discrepancies between trial entries and published final reports of orthodontic randomized controlled Trials


Koufatzidou, Marianna; Koletsi, Despina; Fleming, Padhraig S; Polychronopoulou, Argy; Pandis, Nikolaos (2019). Outcome reporting discrepancies between trial entries and published final reports of orthodontic randomized controlled Trials. European Journal of Orthodontics, 41(3):225-230.

Abstract

Background/Objectives The aim of this study was to identify outcome-related discrepancies between registry trial entries and final published reports in orthodontic randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The percentage of registered orthodontic RCTs was also recorded. Materials/Method Five trial registries, ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/), International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry (http://www.isrctn.com/), European Union Clinical Trials Register (https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/), Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (http://www.anzctr.org.au/) and Clinical Trials Registry of India (www.ctri.nic.in/) were searched up to April 2018 in order to identify completed orthodontic RCTs. The unique trial identifier, the title and authors name were used to search for publications based on entries within Google (https://www.google.com), Google Scholar (https://scholar.google.gr/) and MEDLINE via PubMed (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/). Outcome reporting discrepancies and a number of other entry/publication characteristics were recorded including timing of registration, type of journal/publication, significance of the primary outcome in the final report. The number of trials registered among the total number of published RCTs in orthodontics was recorded within the time span assessed. Results One hundred and twenty-four entries were identified for completed orthodontic RCTs, whereas 53 of those were related to published final reports. Outcome reporting discrepancies were ascertained for 47 per cent of publications (n = 2 5); discrepancies were more prevalent for non-primary outcomes (n = 21, 40 per cent). Only 16 per cent of the published orthodontic RCTs had been registered. Limitations Only a subset of trial entries were assessed as these were related to publication records. Conclusions/Implications Registration of clinical trials in orthodontics remains far from universal. A significant level of outcome reporting discrepancy was observed within this subset of registered trials.

Abstract

Background/Objectives The aim of this study was to identify outcome-related discrepancies between registry trial entries and final published reports in orthodontic randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The percentage of registered orthodontic RCTs was also recorded. Materials/Method Five trial registries, ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/), International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry (http://www.isrctn.com/), European Union Clinical Trials Register (https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/), Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (http://www.anzctr.org.au/) and Clinical Trials Registry of India (www.ctri.nic.in/) were searched up to April 2018 in order to identify completed orthodontic RCTs. The unique trial identifier, the title and authors name were used to search for publications based on entries within Google (https://www.google.com), Google Scholar (https://scholar.google.gr/) and MEDLINE via PubMed (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/). Outcome reporting discrepancies and a number of other entry/publication characteristics were recorded including timing of registration, type of journal/publication, significance of the primary outcome in the final report. The number of trials registered among the total number of published RCTs in orthodontics was recorded within the time span assessed. Results One hundred and twenty-four entries were identified for completed orthodontic RCTs, whereas 53 of those were related to published final reports. Outcome reporting discrepancies were ascertained for 47 per cent of publications (n = 2 5); discrepancies were more prevalent for non-primary outcomes (n = 21, 40 per cent). Only 16 per cent of the published orthodontic RCTs had been registered. Limitations Only a subset of trial entries were assessed as these were related to publication records. Conclusions/Implications Registration of clinical trials in orthodontics remains far from universal. A significant level of outcome reporting discrepancy was observed within this subset of registered trials.

Statistics

Citations

Altmetrics

Downloads

29 downloads since deposited on 29 Nov 2018
26 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Center for Dental Medicine > Clinic for Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:24 May 2019
Deposited On:29 Nov 2018 11:50
Last Modified:23 Feb 2020 08:06
Publisher:Oxford University Press
ISSN:0141-5387
OA Status:Green
Free access at:Publisher DOI. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjy046
PubMed ID:29992332

Download

Green Open Access

Download PDF  'Outcome reporting discrepancies between trial entries and published final reports of orthodontic randomized controlled Trials'.
Preview
Content: Accepted Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 828kB
View at publisher