Nico Riedel1, Susanne Wieschowski2, Till Bruckner3, Martin R Holst4, Hannes Kahrass2, Edris Nury5, Joerg J Meerpohl6, Maia Salholz-Hillel3, Daniel Strech7. 1. QUEST Center for Transforming Biomedical Research, Berlin Institute of Health (BIH) at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. Electronic address: nico.riedel@bih-charite.de. 2. History, and Philosophy of Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Institute for Ethics, Hannover, Germany. 3. QUEST Center for Transforming Biomedical Research, Berlin Institute of Health (BIH) at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 4. QUEST Center for Transforming Biomedical Research, Berlin Institute of Health (BIH) at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany; History, and Philosophy of Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Institute for Ethics, Hannover, Germany. 5. Faculty of Medicine, Institute for Evidence in Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. 6. Faculty of Medicine, Institute for Evidence in Medicine, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; Cochrane Germany, Cochrane Germany Foundation, Freiburg, Germany. 7. QUEST Center for Transforming Biomedical Research, Berlin Institute of Health (BIH) at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Timely publication of clinical trial results is central for evidence-based medicine. In this follow-up study we benchmark the performance of German university medical centers (UMCs) regarding timely dissemination of clinical trial results in recent years. METHODS: Following the same search and tracking methods used in our previous study for the years 2009 - 2013, we identified trials led by German UMCs completed between 2014 and 2017 and tracked results dissemination for the identified trials. RESULTS: We identified 1,658 trials in the 2014 -2017 cohort. Of these trials, 43% published results as either journal publication or summary results within 24 months after completion date, which is an improvement of 3.8% percentage points compared to the previous study. At the UMC level, the proportion published after 24 months ranged from 14% to 71%. Five years after completion, 30% of the trials still remained unpublished. CONCLUSION: Despite minor improvements compared to the previously investigated cohort, the proportion of timely reported trials led by German UMCs remains low. German UMCs should take further steps to improve the proportion of timely reported trials.
OBJECTIVE: Timely publication of clinical trial results is central for evidence-based medicine. In this follow-up study we benchmark the performance of German university medical centers (UMCs) regarding timely dissemination of clinical trial results in recent years. METHODS: Following the same search and tracking methods used in our previous study for the years 2009 - 2013, we identified trials led by German UMCs completed between 2014 and 2017 and tracked results dissemination for the identified trials. RESULTS: We identified 1,658 trials in the 2014 -2017 cohort. Of these trials, 43% published results as either journal publication or summary results within 24 months after completion date, which is an improvement of 3.8% percentage points compared to the previous study. At the UMC level, the proportion published after 24 months ranged from 14% to 71%. Five years after completion, 30% of the trials still remained unpublished. CONCLUSION: Despite minor improvements compared to the previously investigated cohort, the proportion of timely reported trials led by German UMCs remains low. German UMCs should take further steps to improve the proportion of timely reported trials.