Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Introduction
Evidence in the medical literature suggests that trial registration may not be preventing selective reporting of results. We wondered about the place of such information in the peer-review process.Method
We asked 1,503 corresponding authors of clinical trials and 1,733 reviewers to complete an online survey soliciting their views on the use of trial registry information during the peer-review process.Results
1,136 authors (n = 713) and reviewers (n = 423) responded (37.5%); 676 (59.5%) had reviewed an article reporting a clinical trial in the past 2 years. Among these, 232 (34.3%) examined information registered on a trial registry. If one or more items (primary outcome, eligibility criteria, etc.) differed between the registry record and the manuscript
SUBMITTER: Mathieu S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3622662 | biostudies-literature | 2013
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature