dc.contributor.author
Bruckner, Till
dc.contributor.author
Rodgers, Florence
dc.contributor.author
Styrmisdóttir, Lea
dc.contributor.author
Keestra, Sarai
dc.date.accessioned
2023-04-25T13:49:34Z
dc.date.available
2023-04-25T13:49:34Z
dc.identifier.uri
https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/39103
dc.identifier.uri
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-38819
dc.description.abstract
IMPORTANCE Research funders can reduce research waste and publication bias by requiring their grantees to register and report clinical trials.
OBJECTIVE To determine the extent to which 21 major European research funders' efforts to reduce research waste and publication bias in clinical trials meet World Health Organization (WHO) best practice benchmarks and to investigate areas for improvement.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cross-sectional study was based on 2 to 3 independent assessments of each funder's publicly available documentation and validation of results with funders during 2021. Included funders were the 21 largest nonmultilateral public and philanthropic medical research funders in Europe, with a combined budget of more than US $22 billion.
EXPOSURES Scoring of funders using an 11-item assessment tool based on WHO best practice benchmarks, grouped into 4 broad categories: trial registries, academic publication, monitoring, and sanctions. Funder references to reporting standards were captured.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was funder adoption or nonadoption of 11 policy and monitoring measures to reduce research waste and publication bias as set out by WHO best practices. The secondary outcomes were whether and how funder policies referred to reporting standards. Outcomes were preregistered after a pilot phase that used the same outcome measures.
RESULTS Among 21 of the largest nonmultilateral public and philanthropic funders in Europe, some best practices were more widely adopted than others, with 14 funders (66.7%) mandating prospective trial registration and 6 funders (28.6%) requiring that trial results be made public on trial registries within 12 months of trial completion. Less than half of funders actively monitored whether trials were registered (9 funders [42.9%]) or whether results were made public (8 funders [38.1%]). Funders implemented a mean of 4 of 11 best practices in clinical trial transparency (36.4%) set out by WHO. The extent to which funders adopted WHO best practice items varied widely, ranging from 0 practices for the French Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique and the ministries of health of Germany and Italy to 10 practices (90.9%) for the UK National Institute of Health Research. Overall, 9 funders referred to reporting standards in their policies.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This study found that many European medical research funder policy and monitoring measures fell short of WHO best practices. These findings suggest that funders worldwide may need to identify and address gaps in policies and processes.
en
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subject
Best Practices
en
dc.subject
European Medical Research Funder
en
dc.subject
World Health Organization
en
dc.subject.ddc
600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften::610 Medizin und Gesundheit::610 Medizin und Gesundheit
dc.title
Adoption of World Health Organization Best Practices in Clinical Trial Transparency Among European Medical Research Funder Policies
dc.type
Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.articlenumber
e2222378
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.doi
10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.22378
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journaltitle
JAMA Network Open
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.number
8
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.originalpublishername
American Medical Association
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.volume
5
refubium.affiliation
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
refubium.resourceType.isindependentpub
no
dcterms.accessRights.openaire
open access
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pmid
35913742
dcterms.isPartOf.eissn
2574-3805