Institutional dashboards on clinical trial transparency for

Institutional dashboards on clinical trial transparency for University Medical Centers: A case study

Author summary Why was this study done? Clinical trials are the foundation of evidence-based medicine and should follow established guidelines for transparency: Their results should be available, findable, and accessible regardless of the outcome. Previous studies have shown that many clinical trials fall short of transparency guidelines, which distorts the medical evidence base, creates research waste, and undermines medical decision-making. University Medical Centers (UMCs) play an important role in increasing clinical trial transparency but are often unaware of their performance on these practices, making it difficult to drive improvement. What did the researchers do and find? We developed a pipeline to evaluate clinical trials across several established practices for clinical trial transparency and applied it in a cohort of 2,895 clinical trials led by German UMCs. We found that while some practices are gaining adherence (e.g., prospective registration in ClinicalTrials.gov increased from 33% to 75% over the period considered), there is much room for improvement (e.g., 41% of trials reported results within 2 years of trial completion). We developed a dashboard to communicate these transparency assessments to UMCs and support their efforts to improve. What do these findings mean? Our study demonstrates the feasibility of developing a dashboard to communicate adherence to established practices for clinical trial transparency. By highlighting areas for improvement, the dashboard provides actionable information to UMCs and empowers their efforts to improve. The dashboard may inform interventions to increase clinical trial transparency and be scaled to other countries and stakeholders, such as funders or clinical trial registries.

Related Keywords

Germany , Rennes , Bretagne , France , United States , Hong Kong , California , Poland , Berlin , French , German , Florian Naudet , Klinischer Studien , Martin Holst , Access Publication Fund Of Charit , Coalition On Advancing Research Assessment Co , Drug Administration Amendments , Ministry Of Education , University Medical Center , International Committee Of Medical Journal Editors , World Health Organization , University Medical Centers Umcs , European Commission Open Science , German Research Foundation , University Of Rennes , Declaration On Research Assessment , Research Of Germany , Agreement On Reforming Research Assessment , University Medical Centers , Medical Centers , German Clinical Trials Register , Trials Register , Creative Commons Attribution License , Federal Ministry , Consolidated Standards , Reporting Trials , Clinical Trial , Investigational Medicinal Product , Digital Object Identifier , Research Assessment , Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien , Drug Administration Amendments Act , International Committee , Medical Journal Editors , Open Access , Open Science Framework , Observational Studies , World Health , Joint Statement , Public Disclosure , Clinical Trials , European Commission , Open Science , German Open Access , French Open Science Monitor , Hong Kong Principles , Advancing Research Assessment , Reforming Research Assessment , Tamarinde Haven , Open Access Publication Fund , Open Access Publishing , Clinical Trial Reporting , European Union , Medicine And Health Sciences , Scientific Publishing ,

© 2025 Vimarsana