Literature DB >> 29498543

The reporting of harms in publications on randomized controlled trials funded by the "Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique," a French academic funding scheme.

Romain Favier1, Sabrina Crépin1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Accurate information on harms arising from medical interventions is essential for assessing benefit-risk ratios. Since 2004, there has been an extension of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement for reporting harms data in publications on randomized clinical trials. The objective of our study was to assess the quality of this reporting from academic randomized clinical trials on drugs.
METHODS: We searched for articles on randomized clinical trials funded between 2004 and 2008 by the "Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique." We included all published randomized clinical trials that assessed drugs. Harm-related data were extracted and compared with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Harms extension, and the space in the articles devoted to harms data was measured.
RESULTS: In total, 37 randomized clinical trials met the inclusion criteria. The median harm score was 9/18. In 73.0% of the randomized clinical trials, the reporting of adverse events was selective. Less than 50% of articles provided information on reasons for drug discontinuation that were related to adverse events. The score and the space allocated to harms were higher in antineoplastic and immunomodulating drugs randomized clinical trials, while the median proportion of the space in the results section allocated to harms was 16.8%. In 67.6% of the articles, the space allocated to the authors' list and affiliations was greater than the space in the results section allocated to descriptions of harms. No significant improvement in the score or the space allocation was observed during the study period.
CONCLUSION: Reporting of harms in French academic drug randomized clinical trials is suboptimal; moreover, this shortcoming is a critical barrier to evaluating the benefit-risk ratio of drug randomized clinical trials. Thus, the authors should be encouraged to adhere to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Harms extension.

Keywords:  Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Harms extension; academic research; adverse event reporting; harms data; investigational drug; randomized clinical trial

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29498543     DOI: 10.1177/1740774518760565

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Trials        ISSN: 1740-7745            Impact factor:   2.486


  6 in total

1.  Validity of data extraction in evidence synthesis practice of adverse events: reproducibility study.

Authors:  Chang Xu; Tianqi Yu; Luis Furuya-Kanamori; Lifeng Lin; Liliane Zorzela; Xiaoqin Zhou; Hanming Dai; Yoon Loke; Sunita Vohra
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2022-05-10

Review 2.  Analysis and reporting of adverse events in randomised controlled trials: a review.

Authors:  Rachel Phillips; Lorna Hazell; Odile Sauzet; Victoria Cornelius
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-03-01       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Recommendations for the Reporting of Harms in Manuscripts on Clinical Trials Assessing Osteoarthritis Drugs: A Consensus Statement from the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO).

Authors:  Germain Honvo; Raveendhara R Bannuru; Olivier Bruyère; Francois Rannou; Gabriel Herrero-Beaumont; Daniel Uebelhart; Cyrus Cooper; Nigel Arden; Philip G Conaghan; Jean-Yves Reginster; Thierry Thomas; Tim McAlindon
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 3.923

Review 4.  Statistical methods for the analysis of adverse event data in randomised controlled trials: a scoping review and taxonomy.

Authors:  Rachel Phillips; Odile Sauzet; Victoria Cornelius
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2020-11-30       Impact factor: 4.615

5.  Advantages of visualisations to evaluate and communicate adverse event information in randomised controlled trials.

Authors:  Victoria Cornelius; Suzie Cro; Rachel Phillips
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2020-12-22       Impact factor: 2.279

6.  Understanding current practice, identifying barriers and exploring priorities for adverse event analysis in randomised controlled trials: an online, cross-sectional survey of statisticians from academia and industry.

Authors:  Rachel Phillips; Victoria Cornelius
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-06-11       Impact factor: 2.692

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.