Publication status of completed registered studies in paediatric appendicitis: a cross-sectional analysis.
ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:Appendicitis is considered the most frequent surgical emergency in children. While the management of paediatric appendicitis is evolving, the precise amount of unpublished completed trials, potentially introducing bias into meta-analyses, is unknown. Controversial issues include the appropriate choice of surgical procedures, criteria for diagnosis of appendicitis, the role of antibiotic treatment and pain management. Selective reporting may introduce bias into evidence-based clinical decision-making, and the current, precise extent of unpublished results in paediatric appendicitis is unknown. We therefore assessed the publication status of completed clinical studies involving children registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. DESIGN:Cross sectional analysis. STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology criteria were applied for design and analysis. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS:ClinicalTrials.gov was queried for completed studies which were matched to publications on ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed or Google Scholar. If no publication could be identified, principal investigators were contacted. INTERVENTIONS/EXPOSURE:Observational analysis. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:The proportion of published and unpublished studies was calculated. Subgroup analysis included studies on surgical procedures, diagnosis, antibiotic treatment and pain management. RESULTS:Out of n=52 completed clinical studies involving children with appendicitis, n=33 (63%) were published and n=19 (37%) were unpublished. Eighty-three per cent (n=43/52) of clinical trials assessed the above-listed controversial issues. Diagnostic studies were most rigorously published (91% of trials reported), data on surgical procedures, antibiotic and pain management were less transparent. Sixty-six per cent of interventional studies and 60% of randomised studies were published. Median time-to-publication, for example, the delay between completion of the trial until public availability of the results was 24 (IQR 12-36), range 2-92 months. CONCLUSION:Despite the importance of appendicitis in clinical practice for the paediatric surgeon, there remains scientific uncertainty due to unpublished clinical trial results with room for improvement in the future. These data are helpful in framing the shifting paradigms in paediatric appendicitis because it adds transparency to the debate.
Project description:OBJECTIVES:Emergence delirium (ED) is a frequent and potentially serious complication of general anaesthesia in children. Although there are various treatment strategies, no general management recommendations can be made. Selective reporting of study results may impair clinical decision-making. We, therefore, analysed whether the results of completed registered clinical studies in patients with paediatric ED are publicly available or remain unpublished. DESIGN:Cross-sectional analysis. SETTING:ClinicalTrials.gov and ClinicalTrialsRegister.eu. PARTICIPANTS AND OUTCOME MEASURES:We determined the proportion of published and unpublished studies registered at ClinicalTrials.gov and ClinicalTrialsRegister.eu that were marked as completed by 1st September 2018. The major trial and literature databases were used to search for publications. In addition, the study investigators were contacted directly. For published trials, time to publication was calculated as the difference in months between study completion date and publication date. RESULTS:Of the 44 registered studies on paediatric ED, only 24 (54%) were published by September 2019. Published trials contained data from n=2556 patients, whereas n=1644 patients were enrolled in unpublished trials. Median time to publication was 19 months. Studies completed in recent years were published faster, but still only 9 of 24 trials were published within 12 months of completion. CONCLUSION:There is a distinct publication gap in clinical research in paediatric ED that may have an impact on meta-analyses and clinical practice.
Project description:Pediatric liver transplantation is a highly specialized, challenging field. Selective reporting may introduce bias into evidence based clinical decision making, but the precise extent of unpublished data in pediatric liver transplantation is unknown today. We therefore assessed the public availability of completed clinical trials in pediatric liver transplantation.We determined the proportion of published and unpublished pre-registered, completed pediatric liver transplantation studies on ClinicalTrials.gov. The major trial and literature databases, i.e., clinicaltrials.gov, Pubmed, and Google Scholar were searched for publications. In addition, principal investigators or sponsors were contacted directly. STROBE criteria were applied for the descriptive analysis.Out of N = 33 studies focusing on pediatric liver transplantation registered as completed until March 2014 on clinicaltrials.gov, N = 19 (58%) studies were published until February 2015, whereas N = 14 (42%) studies remained unpublished. The unpublished trials contain data from N = 2105 (35%) patients out of a total population of N = 6044 study participants. Median time-to-publication, i.e., the period from completion of the trial until public availability of the data was 23 IQR 10 to 28 months. Most pertinent key questions in pediatric liver transplantation, i.e., surgical procedures, immunosuppression, concomitant infections, and graft rejection were addressed in 48% of studies (N = 16/33), half of which were published.Half of the clinical trials in pediatric liver transplantation focused on key questions such as surgical procedures, immunosuppression, concomitant infections, and graft rejection. There is still a considerable amount of unpublished studies results in pediatric liver transplantation. Time from study completion to publication was almost twice as long as the 12 months mandatory FDAAA-timeline with a trend towards acceleration over time. The data should serve as a baseline for future progress in the field. More stringent publication of completed trials and focused multicenter research should be encouraged.
Project description:OBJECTIVES:We determined the number and time-to-public availability of study results of published and unpublished clinical studies in paediatric mechanical ventilation (MV) and ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI), which were registered as completed on ClinicalTrials.gov. Furthermore, we explored the pattern of represented research study subtopics and the corresponding study populations. SETTING:Literature search based on ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed and Google Scholar from 9 July 2017 to 27 September 2017. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Assessment, if studies included in our analysis had been published. Assessment of primary research focus, patient enrolment and age representation of the analysed studies. RESULTS:We identified n=109 registered and completed clinical studies on paediatric MV and VILI (enrolment: 22?233 participants). 71% were published, including data from 18?647 subjects. 29% of studies were unpublished, containing data from 3586 subjects. Median time-to-public availability of study results was 22 (IQR, 12.8-41.5) months. The most important study subtopics were biophysical and technical aspects of MV (32 studies), administration of drugs to mitigate VILI through various mechanisms (40 studies) and diagnostic procedures (16 studies). n=66/109 (61%) studies exclusively focused on children below 1?year of age and n=2/109 (2%) exclusively on children between 1 and 14 years. CONCLUSIONS:One-third of clinical studies in paediatric MV and VILI registered as completed on ClinicalTrials.gov remained unpublished and contained data on 3586 study participants. The overall median time-to-public availability of study results was longer than the deadline of 12 months mandated by the Food and Drug Administration Amendment Act of 2007. Important and clinically relevant research study subtopics were represented in the research questions investigated in paediatric MV and VILI. The study population was skewed towards children younger than 1?year which indicates, that there is a substantial need for clinical VILI research in older children.
Project description:Although selective reporting of clinical trial results introduces bias into evidence based clinical decision making, publication bias in pediatric epilepsy is unknown today. Since there is a considerable ambiguity in the treatment of an important and common clinical problem, pediatric seizures, we assessed the public availability of results of phase 3 clinical trials that evaluated treatments of seizures in children and adolescents as a surrogate for the extent of publication bias in pediatric epilepsy.We determined the proportion of published and unpublished study results of phase 3 clinical trials that were registered as completed on ClinicalTrials.gov. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, and Google Scholar for publications and contacted principal investigators or sponsors. The analysis was performed according to STROBE criteria.Considering studies that were completed before 2014 (N = 99), 75 (76%) pediatric phase 3 clinical trials were published but 24 (24%) remained unpublished. The unpublished studies concealed evidence from 4,437 patients. Mean time-to-publication was 25 SD ± 15.6 months, more than twice as long as mandated.Ten years after the ICMJE's clinical trials registration initiative there is still a considerable amount of selective reporting and delay of publication that potentially distorts the body of evidence in the treatment of pediatric seizures.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Acute viral bronchiolitis is very common in infants and children up to 2 years. Some patients develop serious respiratory symptoms and need to be hospitalized. In 2014, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) published a guideline on acute bronchiolitis which has gained global acceptance. We hypothesized that a publication gap, which is increasingly perceived in clinical medicine, might have also affected these universal recommendations. METHODS:We determined the proportion of published and unpublished studies registered at ClinicalTrials.gov that were marked as completed by October 1st 2018. The major trial and literature databases were used to search for publications. In addition, the study investigators were contacted directly. RESULTS:Of the 69 registered studies on the treatment of acute viral bronchiolitis, only 50 (72%) have been published by November 2019. Published trials contained data from n = 9403 patients, whereas n = 4687 patients were enrolled in unpublished trials. Median time to publication was 20 months, and only 8 of 50 trials were published within 12 months after completion. Only 40% of the clinical trials that were completed after the release of the AAP guideline were subsequently published as compared to 80% before 2014. CONCLUSION:There is a significant publication gap regarding therapy of acute viral bronchiolitis that may have influenced certain recommendations of the AAP guideline. In turn, recommendations of the guideline might have discouraged investigators to publish their results after its release.
Project description:Objectives Acute appendicitis is the most common surgical condition in children. In the UK, appendicectomy is the most common treatment with non-operative management unusual. Due to concerns about the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission during surgical procedures, surgeons were advised to consider non-operative treatment and avoid laparoscopy where possible. This study aims to report management and outcomes, to date, of children with appendicitis in the UK and Ireland during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design Survey of consultant surgeons who treat children with appendicitis that informed a prospective multicentre observational cohort study. Setting Data were collected from centres in the UK and Ireland for cases admitted between 1 April and 31 May 2020 (first 2 months of the COVID-19 pandemic) at both general surgical and specialist paediatric surgical centres. Participants The study cohort includes 838 children with a clinical and/or radiological diagnosis of acute appendicitis of which 527 (63%) were male. Main outcomes measured Primary outcome was treatment strategy used for acute appendicitis. Other outcomes reported include change in treatment strategy over time, use of diagnostic imaging and important patient outcomes to 30 days following hospital admission. Results From very early in the pandemic surgeons experienced a change in their management of children with appendicitis and almost all surgeons who responded to the survey anticipated further changes during the pandemic. Overall, 326/838 (39%) were initially treated non-operatively of whom 81/326 (25%) proceeded to appendicectomy within the initial hospital admission. Of cases treated initially surgically 243/512 (48%) were performed laparoscopically. Diagnostic imaging was used in 445/838 (53%) children. Cases treated non-operatively had a shorter hospital stay than those treated surgically but hospital readmissions within 30 days were similar between groups. In cases treated surgically the negative appendicectomy rate was 4.5%. There was a trend towards increased use of surgical treatment and from open to laparoscopic appendicectomy as the pandemic progressed. Conclusion Non-operative treatment of appendicitis has been widely used for the first time in children in the UK and Ireland and is safe and effective in selected patients. Overall patient outcomes do not appear to have been adversely impacted by change in management during the pandemic thus far.
Project description:To estimate the frequency with which results of large randomized clinical trials registered with ClinicalTrials.gov are not available to the public.Cross sectional analysisTrials with at least 500 participants that were prospectively registered with ClinicalTrials.gov and completed prior to January 2009.PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embase were searched to identify published manuscripts containing trial results. The final literature search occurred in November 2012. Registry entries for unpublished trials were reviewed to determine whether results for these studies were available in the ClinicalTrials.gov results database.The frequency of non-publication of trial results and, among unpublished studies, the frequency with which results are unavailable in the ClinicalTrials.gov database.Of 585 registered trials, 171 (29%) remained unpublished. These 171 unpublished trials had an estimated total enrollment of 299,763 study participants. The median time between study completion and the final literature search was 60 months for unpublished trials. Non-publication was more common among trials that received industry funding (150/468, 32%) than those that did not (21/117, 18%), P=0.003. Of the 171 unpublished trials, 133 (78%) had no results available in ClinicalTrials.gov.Among this group of large clinical trials, non-publication of results was common and the availability of results in the ClinicalTrials.gov database was limited. A substantial number of study participants were exposed to the risks of trial participation without the societal benefits that accompany the dissemination of trial results.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Treatment options and decisions are often based on the results of clinical trials. We have evaluated the public availability of results from completed, registered phase III clinical trials on diabetic nephropathy and current treatment options. METHODS:This was a cross-sectional analysis in which STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology criteria were applied for design and analysis. In June 2017, 34 completed phase III clinical trials on diabetic nephropathy in the ClinicalTrials. gov registry were identified and matched to publications in the ClinicalTrials.gov registry and to those in the PubMed and Google Scholar databases. If no publication was identified, the principal investigator was contacted. The ratio of published and non-published studies was calculated. Various parameters, including study design, drugs, and comparators provided, were analyzed. RESULTS:Drugs/supplements belonged to 26 different categories of medications, with the main ones being angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-II receptors blockers, and dipeptidyl-peptidase-4-inhibitors. Among the trials completed before 2016 (n?=?32), 22 (69%) were published, and ten (31%) remained unpublished. Thus, data on 11 different interventions and more than 1000 patients remained undisclosed. Mean time to publication was 26.5 months, which is longer than the time constrictions imposed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act. Most trials only showed weak effects on micro- and macroalbuminuria, with an absolute risk reduction of 1.0 and 0.3%, respectively, and the number needed to treat varied between 91 and 333, without any relevant effect on end-stage-renal disease by intensive glucose-lowering treatment. Comparison of the results, however, was difficult since study design, interventions, and the renal outcome parameters vary greatly between the studies. CONCLUSION:Despite the financial and human resources involved and the relevance for therapeutic guidelines and clinical decisions, about one-third of phase III clinical trials on diabetic nephropathy remain unpublished. Interventions used in published trials showed a low efficacy on renal outcome. FUNDING:Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG): SFB 1118.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Few medicines have been approved for children, leading to rates of off-label prescribing reported to be as high as 90%. In 2007, the European Union adopted the Paediatric Regulation, which mandates that pharmaceutical companies conduct paediatric studies for all new medicines, unless granted a waiver. We aimed to evaluate the availability of paediatric trial results from studies required under the Paediatric Regulation for new medicines authorised in the EU. METHODS AND FINDINGS:The European Medicines Agency (EMA) public database of paediatric investigation plans was searched for new medicines centrally authorised in the EU between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2014 with at least 1 required paediatric study. For our study cohort of paediatric clinical trials required for these medicines, we used internal EMA databases and publicly available trial registries to determine changes to the planned completion date or study design, rates of trial completion, time to trial completion, and results reporting (peer-reviewed publication or posting on trial registry). Cox proportional hazards regression models were constructed to examine factors associated with study completion. A total of 326 paediatric clinical trials were required for 122 novel medicines authorised by the EMA between 2010 and 2014. In all, 76% (247/326) of paediatric studies were not planned to be completed until after the initial marketing authorisation. The planned completion dates for 50% (162/326) were further postponed by a median of 2.2 years. Overall, 38% (124/326) of paediatric studies were completed as of 30 November 2017. The rate of trial completion for paediatric studies planned to be completed after initial marketing authorisation was 23% (56/247), versus 86% (68/79) for trials planned to be completed before authorisation (adjusted hazard ratio 0.11; 95% CI 0.06-0.19). Among completed studies, the results were reported in a public registry or in the peer-reviewed literature for 85% (105/124) at a median of 1.1 years after study completion, and 60% (74/124) were published in a peer-reviewed journal. Limitations of this study include the potential lack of generalisability to medicines not authorised by the EMA and the possibility for more of these trials to be completed or published in the future. CONCLUSIONS:The completion of many paediatric studies required under the Paediatric Regulation has been delayed. Paediatric studies planned to be completed after marketing authorisation were associated with a lower likelihood of eventual completion, highlighting the need to examine the implementation of current policies in ensuring timely availability of important paediatric information.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Paediatric surgical care is increasingly being centralized away from low-volume centres, and prehospital delay is considered a risk factor for more complicated appendicitis. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of paediatric appendicitis in Sweden, and to assess whether distance to the hospital was a risk factor for complicated disease. METHODS:A nationwide cohort study of all paediatric appendicitis cases in Sweden, 2001-2014, was undertaken, including incidence of disease in different population strata, with trends over time. The risk of complicated disease was determined by regression methods, with travel time as the primary exposure and individual-level socioeconomic determinants as independent variables. RESULTS:Some 38?939 children with appendicitis were identified. Of these, 16·8 per cent had complicated disease, and the estimated risk of paediatric appendicitis by age 18?years was 2·5 per cent. Travel time to the treating hospital was not associated with complicated disease (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1·00 (95 per cent c.i. 0·96 to 1·05) per 30-min increase; P?=?0·934). Level of education (P?=?0·177) and family income (P?=?0·120) were not independently associated with increased risk of complicated disease. Parental unemployment (adjusted OR 1·17, 95 per cent c.i. 1·05 to 1·32; P?=?0·006) and having parents born outside Sweden (1 parent born in Sweden: adjusted OR 1·12, 1·01 to 1·25; both parents born outside Sweden: adjusted OR 1·32, 1·18 to 1·47; P?<?0·001) were associated with an increased risk of complicated appendicitis. CONCLUSION:Every sixth child diagnosed with appendicitis in Sweden has a more complicated course of disease. Geographical distance to the surgical facility was not a risk factor for complicated appendicitis.