Towards transparency: adoption of WHO best practices in clinical trial registration and reporting among top medical research funders in the USA.

Objective: To assess to what extent the clinical trial policies of the largest public and philanthropic funders of clinical research in the United States meet WHO best practices in trial registration and reporting.

Methods: Public and philanthropic funders of clinical trials in the USA with >US$50 million annual spend were selected. The funders were assessed using an 11-item scoring tool based on WHO Joint Statement benchmarks.

Are European clinical trial funders policies on clinical trial registration and reporting improving? A cross-sectional study.

Objectives: Assess the extent to which the clinical trial registration and reporting policies of 25 of the world's largest public and philanthropic medical research funders meet best practice benchmarks as stipulated by the 2017 WHO Joint Statement, and document changes in the policies and monitoring systems of 19 European funders over the past year.

Design Setting Participants: Cross-sectional study, based on assessments of each funder's publicly available documentation plus validation of results by funders. Our cohort includes 25 of the largest medical research funders in Europe, Oceania, South Asia, and Canada.

Measurement challenges and causes of incomplete results reporting of biomedical animal studies: Results from an interview study.

Background: Existing evidence indicates that a significant amount of biomedical research involving animals remains unpublished. At the same time, we lack standards for measuring the extent of results reporting in animal research. Publication rates may vary significantly depending on the level of measurement such as an entire animal study, individual experiments within a study, or the number of animals used.

Adoption of World Health Organization Best Practices in Clinical Trial Transparency Among European Medical Research Funder Policies.

Importance: Research funders can reduce research waste and publication bias by requiring their grantees to register and report clinical trials.

Objective: To determine the extent to which 21 major European research funders' efforts to reduce research waste and publication bias in clinical trials meet World Health Organization (WHO) best practice benchmarks and to investigate areas for improvement.

Design, Setting, And Participants: This cross-sectional study was based on 2 to 3 independent assessments of each funder's publicly available documentation and validation of results with funders during 2021.

Improving clinical trial transparency at UK universities: Evaluating 3 years of policies and reporting performance on the European Clinical Trial Register.

Background: January 2019, the House of Commons' Science and Technology Committee sent letters to UK universities admonishing them to achieve compliance with results reporting requirements for Clinical Trials of Investigative Medicinal Products by summer 2019. This study documents changes in the clinical trial policies and Clinical Trials of Investigative Medicinal Product reporting performance of 20 major UK universities following that intervention.

Methods: Freedom of Information requests were filed in June 2018 and June 2020 to obtain clinical trial registration and reporting policies covering both Clinical Trials of Investigative Medicinal Products and all other clinical trials.

Results dissemination from completed clinical trials conducted at German university medical centers remained delayed and incomplete. The 2014 -2017 cohort.

Objective: Timely publication of clinical trial results is central for evidence-based medicine. In this follow-up study we benchmark the performance of German university medical centers (UMCs) regarding timely dissemination of clinical trial results in recent years.

Methods: Following the same search and tracking methods used in our previous study for the years 2009 - 2013, we identified trials led by German UMCs completed between 2014 and 2017 and tracked results dissemination for the identified trials.

Comparison of Duration of Postapproval vs Pivotal Trials for Therapeutic Agents Granted US Food and Drug Administration Accelerated Approval, 2009-2018.

This cross-sectional study compares the duration of postapproval trials with that of the pivotal trials used as the basis for the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) approval for all indications receiving accelerated approval from 2009-2018.

Clinical trial reporting performance of thirty UK universities on ClinicalTrials.gov-evaluation of a new tracking tool for the US clinical trial registry.

Clinical trial transparency forms the foundation of evidence-based medicine, and trial sponsors, especially publicly funded institutions such as universities, have an ethical and scientific responsibility to make the results of clinical trials publicly available in a timely fashion. We assessed whether the thirty UK universities receiving the most Medical Research Council funding in 2017-2018 complied with World Health Organization best practices for clinical trial reporting on the US Clinical Trial Registry ( ClinicalTrials.gov ).

[The publication of clinical trial results by German universities is insufficient-this should change].

The results of all clinical drug trials should be published promptly and nonselectively after trial completion. The publication of results appears as a central ethical rule in the Declaration of Helsinki of the World Medical Association. German university hospitals are increasingly being criticized for not meeting these requirements sufficiently.