1. Published registered reports are rare, limited to one journal group, and inadequate for randomized controlled trials in the clinical field
- Author
-
Norah Anthony, Antoine Tisseaux, Florian Naudet, Centre d'Investigation Clinique de La Réunion - INSERM (CIC 1410), Université de La Réunion (UR)-Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM)-Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de La Réunion (CHU La Réunion), CHU Pontchaillou [Rennes], Centre d'Investigation Clinique [Rennes] (CIC), and Université de Rennes (UR)-Hôpital Pontchaillou-Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM)
- Subjects
transparency ,Epidemiology ,Randomized controlled trials ,[SDV.SPEE]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Santé publique et épidémiologie ,protocol ,outcomes switching ,registered report ,reproducibility - Abstract
ObjectiveRegistered reports relate to a new publication of a peer-review of the protocol before the start of the study, followed by an in-principle acceptance by the journal before the study starts. We aimed to describe randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the clinical field published as registered reports.Study design and settingThis cross-sectional study (registration:https://osf.io/zf53p/) included registered report results for RCTs, identified on PubMed/Medline and on a list compiled by the Center for Open Science. It explored the proportion of reports that received in-principle acceptance (and/or published a protocol before inclusion of the first patient) and changes in the primary outcome.ResultsA total of 93 RCT publications identified as registered reports were included. All but one were published in the same journal group. The date of the in-principle acceptance was never documented. For most of these reports (79/93, 84.9 %) a protocol was published after the date of inclusion of the first patient. A change in the primary outcome was noted in 40/93 (44%) of these publications. Three out of the 40 (33%) mentioned this change.ConclusionsRandomized controlled trials in the clinical field identified as registered reports were rare, they originated from a single journal group and did not comply with the basic features of this format.Protocol registrationhttps://osf.io/zf53p/What is new ?The registered report format for clinical randomized controlled (RCTs) trials is still marginal and few journals make use of it.The clinical RCTs identified as registered reports were from a single journal group and did not necessarily comply with the basic features of this format, and common biases may thus persist.To improve research trustworthiness, more efforts need to be made by Journal publishers, trial funders, etc. for the implementation of this format for clinical RCTs.
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF