Avoidable waste of research related to inadequate methods in clinical trials

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 350, Issue , 2015, Pages

  Yordanov, Youri ^a,b   Dechartres, Agnes ^a,c   Porcher, Raphaël ^a,c   Boutron, Isabelle ^a,c,d   Altman, Douglas G ^e   Ravaud, Philippe ^a,c,d,f  

^a HÔTEL DIEU   (France)

^b ASSISTANCE PUBLIQUE HÔPITAUX DE PARIS   (France)

^c UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DESCARTES   (France)

^d French Cochrane Centre   (France)

^e UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^f Centre for Statistics in Medicine University of Oxford ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HUMAN; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; PLANNING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTOCOL COMPLIANCE; PUBLISHING; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RESEARCH; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; WASTE OF RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); EVALUATION STUDY; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); PROCEDURES; PRODUCTIVITY; STATISTICAL BIAS;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; EFFICIENCY; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84926387699     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.h809     Document Type: Review

References (38)

1. Chalmers I, Glasziou P. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet 2009;374:86-9.
2. Al-Shahi Salman R, Beller E, Kagan J, Hemminki E, Phillips RS, Savulescu J, et al. Increasing value and reducing waste in biomedical research regulation and management. Lancet 2014;383:176-85.
3. Chalmers I, Bracken MB, Djulbegovic B, Garattini S, Grant J, Gülmezoglu AM, et al. How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set. Lancet 2014;383:156-65.
4. Chan AW, Song F, Vickers A, Jefferson T, Dickersin K, Gøtzsche PC, et al. Increasing value and reducing waste: addressing inaccessible research. Lancet 2014;383:257-66.
5. Glasziou P, Altman DG, Bossuyt P, Boutron I, Clarke M, Julious S, et al. Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research. Lancet 2014;383:267-76.
6. Ioannidis JP, Greenland S, Hlatky MA, Khoury MJ, Macleod MR, Moher D, et al. Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis. Lancet 2014;383:166-75.
7. Macleod MR, Michie S, Roberts I, Dirnagl U, Chalmers I, Ioannidis JP, et al. Biomedical research: increasing value, reducing waste. Lancet 2014;383:101-4.
8. Scott IA, Glasziou PP. Improving the effectiveness of clinical medicine: the need for better science. Med J Aust 2012;196:304-8.
9. Liberati A. An unfinished trip through uncertainties. BMJ 2004;328:531.
10. UK health, science, and overseas aid: not what they seem. Lancet 2010;376:1437.
11. Nuesch E, Reichenbach S, Trelle S, Rutjes AW, Liewald K, Sterchi R, et al. The importance of allocation concealment and patient blinding in osteoarthritis trials: a meta-epidemiologic study. Arthritis and rheumatism 2009;61:1633-41.
12. Savovic J, Jones HE, Altman DG, Harris RJ, Jüni P, Pildal J, et al. Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomized, controlled trials. Ann Intern Med 2012;157:429-38.
13. Wood L, Egger M, Gluud LL, Schulz KF, Jüni P, Altman DG, et al. Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: metaepidemiological study. BMJ 2008;336:601-5.
14. Psaty BM, Prentice RL. Minimizing bias in randomized trials: the importance of blinding. JAMA 2010;304:793-4.
15. Nuesch E, Trelle S, Reichenbach S, Rutjes AWS, Bürgi E, Scherer M, et al. The effects of excluding patients from the analysis in randomised controlled trials: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ 2009;339:b3244.
16. Tierney JF, Stewart LA. Investigating patient exclusion bias in meta-analysis. Int J Epidemiol 2005;34:79-87.
17. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, Jüni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2011;343:d5928.
18. Hartling L, Bond K, Vandermeer B, Seida J, Dryden DM, Rowe BH, et al. Applying the risk of bias tool in a systematic review of combination long-acting beta-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids for persistent asthma. PLoS One 2011;6:e17242.
19. Hartling L, Hamm MP, Milne A, Vandermeer B, Santaguida PL, Ansari M, et al. Testing the risk of bias tool showed low reliability between individual reviewers and across consensus assessments of reviewer pairs. J Clin Epidemiol 2013;66:973-81.
20. Liang K-Y, Zeger SL. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika 1986;73:13-22.
21. Boutron I, Estellat C, Guittet L, Dechartres A, Sackett DL, Hróbjartsson A, et al. Methods of blinding in reports of randomized controlled trials assessing pharmacologic treatments: a systematic review. PLoS Med 2006;3:e425.
22. Boutron I, Tubach F, Giraudeau B, Ravaud P. Blinding was judged more difficult to achieve and maintain in nonpharmacologic than pharmacologic trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2004;57:543-50.
23. Hartling L, Ospina M, Liang Y, Dryden DM, Hooton N, Seida JK, et al. Risk of bias versus quality assessment of randomised controlled trials: cross sectional study. BMJ 2009;339:b4012.
24. Vale CL, Tierney JF, Burdett S. Can trial quality be reliably assessed from published reports of cancer trials: evaluation of risk of bias assessments in systematic reviews. BMJ 2013;346:f1798.
25. Altman DG, Goodman SN, Schroter S. How statistical expertise is used in medical research. JAMA 2002;287:2817-20.
26. Turner L, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Weeks L, Peters J, Kober T, et al. Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;11:MR000030.
27. Hoffmann TC, Erueti C, Glasziou PP. Poor description of nonpharmacological interventions: analysis of consecutive sample of randomised trials. BMJ 2013;347:f3755.
28. Hopewell S, Dutton S, Yu LM, Chan A-W, Altman DG. The quality of reports of randomised trials in 2000 and 2006: comparative study of articles indexed in PubMed. BMJ 2010;340:c723.
29. Mhaskar R, Djulbegovic B, Magazin A, Soares HP, Kumar A. Published methodological quality of randomized controlled trials does not reflect the actual quality assessed in protocols. J Clin Epidemiol 2012;65:602-9.
30. Soares HP, Daniels S, Kumar A, Clarke M, Scott C, Swannet S, et al. Bad reporting does not mean bad methods for randomised trials: observational study of randomised controlled trials performed by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. BMJ 2004;328:22-4.
31. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. PLoS Med 2010;7:e1000251.
32. Moher D, Weeks L, Ocampo M, Seely D, Sampson M, Altman DG, et al. Describing reporting guidelines for health research: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:718-42.
33. Simera I. EQUATOR Network collates resources for good research. BMJ 2008;337:a2471.
34. Larson EL, Cortazal M. Publication guidelines need widespread adoption. J Clin Epidemiol 2012;65:239-46.
35. Samaan Z, Mbuagbaw L, Kosa D, Borg Debono V, Dillenburg R, Zhang S, et al. A systematic scoping review of adherence to reporting guidelines in health care literature. Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare 2013;6:169-88.
36. Turner L, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D. Does use of the CONSORT Statement impact the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials published in medical journals? A Cochrane review. Syst Rev 2012;1:60.
37. Hopewell S, Altman DG, Moher D, Schulz KF. Endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high impact factor medical journals: a survey of journal editors and journal 'Instructions to Authors'. Trials 2008;9:20.
38. Hopewell S, Ravaud P, Baron G, Boutron I. Effect of editors' implementation of CONSORT guidelines on the reporting of abstracts in high impact medical journals: interrupted time series analysis. BMJ 2012;344:e4178.