A systematic review of clinical trials of pharmacological interventions for acute ischaemic stroke (1955-2008) that were completed, but not published in full

Lorna M. Gibson, Miriam Giovanna Brazzelli, Brenda M. Thomas, Peter A. G. Sandercock*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: We assessed the prevalence, and potential impact of, trials of pharmacological agents for acute stroke that were completed but not published in full. Failure to publish trial data is to be deprecated as it sets aside the altruism of participants' consent to be exposed to the risks of experimental interventions, potentially biases the assessment of the effects of therapies, and may lead to premature discontinuation of research into promising treatments.

Methods: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group's Specialised Register of Trials in June 2008 for completed trials of pharmacological interventions for acute ischaemic stroke, and searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (January 2007 - March 2009) for references to recent full publications. We assessed trial completion status from trial reports, online trials registers and correspondence with experts.

Results: We identified 940 trials. Of these, 125 (19.6%, 95% confidence interval 16.5-22.6) were completed but not published in full by the point prevalence date. They included 16,058 participants (16 trials had over 300 participants each) and tested 89 different interventions. Twenty-two trials with a total of 4,251 participants reported the number of deaths. In these trials, 636/4251 (15.0%) died.

Conclusions: Our data suggest that, at the point prevalence date, a substantial body of evidence that was of relevance both to clinical practice in acute stroke and future research in the field was not published in full. Over 16,000 patients had given informed consent and were exposed to the risks of therapy. Responsibility for non-publication lies with investigators, but pharmaceutical companies, research ethics committees, journals and governments can all encourage the timely publication of trial data.

Original languageEnglish
Article number43
Number of pages12
JournalTrials
Volume11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 22 Apr 2010

Fingerprint

Stroke
Clinical Trials
Pharmacology
Publications
Altruism
Research Ethics Committees
Informed Consent
MEDLINE
Therapeutics
Research Personnel
Confidence Intervals
Research

Keywords

  • recanalization
  • safety
  • publication bias
  • blood-pressure
  • arundic acid ONO-2506
  • therapy
  • acute cerebral-ischemia
  • randomized controlled-trials
  • efficacy
  • combination

Cite this

A systematic review of clinical trials of pharmacological interventions for acute ischaemic stroke (1955-2008) that were completed, but not published in full. / Gibson, Lorna M.; Brazzelli, Miriam Giovanna; Thomas, Brenda M.; Sandercock, Peter A. G.

In: Trials, Vol. 11, 43, 22.04.2010.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{5a0674337a2c43418fb1eb8c8d7b3ff6,
title = "A systematic review of clinical trials of pharmacological interventions for acute ischaemic stroke (1955-2008) that were completed, but not published in full",
abstract = "Background: We assessed the prevalence, and potential impact of, trials of pharmacological agents for acute stroke that were completed but not published in full. Failure to publish trial data is to be deprecated as it sets aside the altruism of participants' consent to be exposed to the risks of experimental interventions, potentially biases the assessment of the effects of therapies, and may lead to premature discontinuation of research into promising treatments.Methods: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group's Specialised Register of Trials in June 2008 for completed trials of pharmacological interventions for acute ischaemic stroke, and searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (January 2007 - March 2009) for references to recent full publications. We assessed trial completion status from trial reports, online trials registers and correspondence with experts.Results: We identified 940 trials. Of these, 125 (19.6{\%}, 95{\%} confidence interval 16.5-22.6) were completed but not published in full by the point prevalence date. They included 16,058 participants (16 trials had over 300 participants each) and tested 89 different interventions. Twenty-two trials with a total of 4,251 participants reported the number of deaths. In these trials, 636/4251 (15.0{\%}) died.Conclusions: Our data suggest that, at the point prevalence date, a substantial body of evidence that was of relevance both to clinical practice in acute stroke and future research in the field was not published in full. Over 16,000 patients had given informed consent and were exposed to the risks of therapy. Responsibility for non-publication lies with investigators, but pharmaceutical companies, research ethics committees, journals and governments can all encourage the timely publication of trial data.",
keywords = "recanalization, safety, publication bias, blood-pressure , arundic acid ONO-2506, therapy, acute cerebral-ischemia, randomized controlled-trials, efficacy, combination",
author = "Gibson, {Lorna M.} and Brazzelli, {Miriam Giovanna} and Thomas, {Brenda M.} and Sandercock, {Peter A. G.}",
year = "2010",
month = "4",
day = "22",
doi = "10.1186/1745-6215-11-43",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
journal = "Trials",
issn = "1745-6215",
publisher = "BioMed Central",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A systematic review of clinical trials of pharmacological interventions for acute ischaemic stroke (1955-2008) that were completed, but not published in full

AU - Gibson, Lorna M.

AU - Brazzelli, Miriam Giovanna

AU - Thomas, Brenda M.

AU - Sandercock, Peter A. G.

PY - 2010/4/22

Y1 - 2010/4/22

N2 - Background: We assessed the prevalence, and potential impact of, trials of pharmacological agents for acute stroke that were completed but not published in full. Failure to publish trial data is to be deprecated as it sets aside the altruism of participants' consent to be exposed to the risks of experimental interventions, potentially biases the assessment of the effects of therapies, and may lead to premature discontinuation of research into promising treatments.Methods: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group's Specialised Register of Trials in June 2008 for completed trials of pharmacological interventions for acute ischaemic stroke, and searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (January 2007 - March 2009) for references to recent full publications. We assessed trial completion status from trial reports, online trials registers and correspondence with experts.Results: We identified 940 trials. Of these, 125 (19.6%, 95% confidence interval 16.5-22.6) were completed but not published in full by the point prevalence date. They included 16,058 participants (16 trials had over 300 participants each) and tested 89 different interventions. Twenty-two trials with a total of 4,251 participants reported the number of deaths. In these trials, 636/4251 (15.0%) died.Conclusions: Our data suggest that, at the point prevalence date, a substantial body of evidence that was of relevance both to clinical practice in acute stroke and future research in the field was not published in full. Over 16,000 patients had given informed consent and were exposed to the risks of therapy. Responsibility for non-publication lies with investigators, but pharmaceutical companies, research ethics committees, journals and governments can all encourage the timely publication of trial data.

AB - Background: We assessed the prevalence, and potential impact of, trials of pharmacological agents for acute stroke that were completed but not published in full. Failure to publish trial data is to be deprecated as it sets aside the altruism of participants' consent to be exposed to the risks of experimental interventions, potentially biases the assessment of the effects of therapies, and may lead to premature discontinuation of research into promising treatments.Methods: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group's Specialised Register of Trials in June 2008 for completed trials of pharmacological interventions for acute ischaemic stroke, and searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (January 2007 - March 2009) for references to recent full publications. We assessed trial completion status from trial reports, online trials registers and correspondence with experts.Results: We identified 940 trials. Of these, 125 (19.6%, 95% confidence interval 16.5-22.6) were completed but not published in full by the point prevalence date. They included 16,058 participants (16 trials had over 300 participants each) and tested 89 different interventions. Twenty-two trials with a total of 4,251 participants reported the number of deaths. In these trials, 636/4251 (15.0%) died.Conclusions: Our data suggest that, at the point prevalence date, a substantial body of evidence that was of relevance both to clinical practice in acute stroke and future research in the field was not published in full. Over 16,000 patients had given informed consent and were exposed to the risks of therapy. Responsibility for non-publication lies with investigators, but pharmaceutical companies, research ethics committees, journals and governments can all encourage the timely publication of trial data.

KW - recanalization

KW - safety

KW - publication bias

KW - blood-pressure

KW - arundic acid ONO-2506

KW - therapy

KW - acute cerebral-ischemia

KW - randomized controlled-trials

KW - efficacy

KW - combination

U2 - 10.1186/1745-6215-11-43

DO - 10.1186/1745-6215-11-43

M3 - Article

C2 - 20412562

VL - 11

JO - Trials

JF - Trials

SN - 1745-6215

M1 - 43

ER -