Non-existent ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers in abstracts indexed by PubMed
Carlisle, B. G.
Show abstract
Prospective registration plays an important role in ensuring the transparency and reliability of clinical trials. Preregistration of clinical trials has been required by the ICMJE since 2005 and mandated by law for most clinical trial types since 2007. It is one of the roles of peer reviewers of a clinical trial publication to confirm that there is concordance between the registry entry and the submitted publication. On October 22, 2019, abstracts for all articles indexed by PubMed with publication type "Clinical Trial" and a publication date after January 1, 2003 were downloaded. Clinical trial registry identifiers were automatically extracted and tested for the existence of a corresponding entry on ClinicalTrials.gov. Among 38,001 published clinical trial registry numbers, 215 (0.6%) do not correspond to a legitimate clinical trial registry entry. While there is a small proportion of non-existent NCT numbers in our sample, even a single non-existent NCT number in a publication represents a failure on the part of journals who publish clinical trials to systematically ensure that reviewers always check clinical trial registry entries for concordance with the text submitted for publication. These results cast doubt on how frequently editors and reviewers evaluate clinical trial reports in light of their corresponding registry entries.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Exploring scalable assessment methods for terminated trials in ClinicalTrials.gov: A cohort analysis of German and Californian trials 96%
- Analysis of clinical trial registry entry histories using the novel R package cthist 95%
- COVID-19-related research data availability and quality according to the FAIR principles: A meta-research study 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Reporting of Retrospective Registration in Clinical Trial Publications 97%
- Comparison of preprints and final journal publications from COVID-19 Studies: Discrepancies in results reporting and spin in interpretation 94%
- An Analysis of Controlled Human Infection Studies Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- The use of the Registered Reports format for publication of randomized clinical trials: a cross-sectional study 96%
- Results reporting for clinical trials led by medical universities and university hospitals in the Nordic countries was often missing or delayed 96%
- Results dissemination from clinical trials conducted at German university medical centres was delayed and incomplete 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Transparency and reporting characteristics of COVID-19 randomized controlled trials 95%
- Postmarketing commitments for novel drugs and biologics approved by the US Food and Drug Administration: a cross-sectional analysis 94%
- Evidence of Unreliable Data and Poor Data Provenance in Clinical Prediction Model Research and Clinical Practice 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Investigator-initiated versus industry-sponsored trials – Visibility and relevance of randomized controlled trials in clinical practice guidelines (IMPACT) 95%
- Approaches in Analyzing Predictors of Trial Failure: A Scoping Review and Meta-epidemiological study 94%
- Creating an Indexing Scheme for Case Series Articles 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.