AIM: Prospective registration in a freely accessible public platform is a key step in the ethical conduct of clinical trials. Little is known of the awareness of clinical trial registration among the scientific community. This study aimed to assess awareness of clinical trial registration among participants attending a medical congress in Sri Lanka. METHODS: Knowledge of trial registration was assessed using a self-administered questionnaire, which spanned domains such as involvement in research, and knowledge and perceptions regarding trial registration. A knowledge score was calculated and correlated with demographic variables. RESULTS: Of 251 survey respondents, 53.4% were male, 74.9% were below the age of 40 years, and 56.6% were currently engaged in research. Registration was considered necessary for trial publication by 73.3%, and 70.5% agreed that trials should be registered prospectively. Most achieved a knowledge score of 'Acceptable' (41%) or 'Good' (19.9%). Mid- or advanced career stages, postgraduate training, current involvement in research, and recent research publications/presentations were correlated with higher knowledge scores (P < 0.05). Beneficial effects considered to be associated with trial registration were access to findings of all trials (61.4%), access to negative results (47.8%), preventing trial duplication (69.3%), and preventing multiple publications (70.1%). Increasing research workload (49.8%), additional restrictions on research conduct (52.2%), and the possibility of 'intellectual theft' (56.2%) were seen as potential negative effects. CONCLUSIONS: Most participants were aware of the need for prospective registration as a requirement for publication of clinical trials. Concerns were expressed regarding several perceived negative effects of trial registration.
AIM: Prospective registration in a freely accessible public platform is a key step in the ethical conduct of clinical trials. Little is known of the awareness of clinical trial registration among the scientific community. This study aimed to assess awareness of clinical trial registration among participants attending a medical congress in Sri Lanka. METHODS: Knowledge of trial registration was assessed using a self-administered questionnaire, which spanned domains such as involvement in research, and knowledge and perceptions regarding trial registration. A knowledge score was calculated and correlated with demographic variables. RESULTS: Of 251 survey respondents, 53.4% were male, 74.9% were below the age of 40 years, and 56.6% were currently engaged in research. Registration was considered necessary for trial publication by 73.3%, and 70.5% agreed that trials should be registered prospectively. Most achieved a knowledge score of 'Acceptable' (41%) or 'Good' (19.9%). Mid- or advanced career stages, postgraduate training, current involvement in research, and recent research publications/presentations were correlated with higher knowledge scores (P < 0.05). Beneficial effects considered to be associated with trial registration were access to findings of all trials (61.4%), access to negative results (47.8%), preventing trial duplication (69.3%), and preventing multiple publications (70.1%). Increasing research workload (49.8%), additional restrictions on research conduct (52.2%), and the possibility of 'intellectual theft' (56.2%) were seen as potential negative effects. CONCLUSIONS: Most participants were aware of the need for prospective registration as a requirement for publication of clinical trials. Concerns were expressed regarding several perceived negative effects of trial registration.