Susanne Wieschowski1, Nico Riedel2, Katharina Wollmann3, Hannes Kahrass1, Stephanie Müller-Ohlraun2, Christopher Schürmann1, Sean Kelley4, Ute Kszuk5, Bob Siegerink6, Ulrich Dirnagl7, Jörg Meerpohl8, Daniel Strech9. 1. Institute for Ethics, History, and Philosophy of Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. 2. QUEST Center for Transforming Biomedical Research, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany. 3. Institute for Evidence in Medicine (for Cochrane Germany Foundation), Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; Cochrane Germany Foundation, Freiburg, Germany. 4. Department of Experimental Neurology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 5. Cochrane Germany Foundation, Freiburg, Germany. 6. Center for Stroke Research Berlin, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 7. QUEST Center for Transforming Biomedical Research, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany; Department of Experimental Neurology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 8. Institute for Evidence in Medicine (for Cochrane Germany Foundation), Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. 9. Institute for Ethics, History, and Philosophy of Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany; QUEST Center for Transforming Biomedical Research, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany; Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. Electronic address: daniel.strech@charite.de.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Timely and comprehensive reporting of clinical trial results builds the backbone of evidence-based medicine and responsible research. The proportion of timely disseminated trial results can inform alternative national and international benchmarking of university medical centers (UMCs). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: For all German UMCs, we tracked all registered trials completed between 2009 and 2013. The results and an interactive website benchmark German UMCs regarding their performance in result dissemination. RESULTS: We identified and tracked 2,132 clinical trials. For 1,509 trials, one of the German UMCs took the academic lead. Of these 1,509 "lead trials," 39% published their results (mostly via journal publications) in a timely manner (<24 months after completion). More than 6 years after study completion, 26% of all eligible lead trials still had not disseminated results. CONCLUSION: Despite substantial attention from many stakeholders to the topic, there is still a strong delay or even absence of result dissemination for many trials. German UMCs have several opportunities to improve this situation. Further research should evaluate whether and how a transparent benchmarking of UMC performance in result dissemination helps to increase value and reduce waste in medical research.
OBJECTIVES: Timely and comprehensive reporting of clinical trial results builds the backbone of evidence-based medicine and responsible research. The proportion of timely disseminated trial results can inform alternative national and international benchmarking of university medical centers (UMCs). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: For all German UMCs, we tracked all registered trials completed between 2009 and 2013. The results and an interactive website benchmark German UMCs regarding their performance in result dissemination. RESULTS: We identified and tracked 2,132 clinical trials. For 1,509 trials, one of the German UMCs took the academic lead. Of these 1,509 "lead trials," 39% published their results (mostly via journal publications) in a timely manner (<24 months after completion). More than 6 years after study completion, 26% of all eligible lead trials still had not disseminated results. CONCLUSION: Despite substantial attention from many stakeholders to the topic, there is still a strong delay or even absence of result dissemination for many trials. German UMCs have several opportunities to improve this situation. Further research should evaluate whether and how a transparent benchmarking of UMC performance in result dissemination helps to increase value and reduce waste in medical research.
Authors: Maia Salholz-Hillel; Peter Grabitz; Nicholas J DeVito; Molly Pugh-Jones; Daniel Strech Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-11-22 Impact factor: 2.692