IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0222117.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Associations between industry involvement and study characteristics at the time of trial registration in biomedical research

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Lene Seidler
  • Kylie E Hunter
  • Nicholas Chartres
  • Lisa M Askie

Abstract

Background: Commercial or industry funding is associated with outcomes that favour the study funder in published studies, across various areas of research. However, it is currently unclear whether there are differences between trials with and without industry involvement at the stage of trial registration. Objective: To determine whether industry involvement (industry sponsorship, funding, or collaboration) is associated with trial characteristics at the time of trial registration. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of all interventional studies registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry in 2017 and classified them by industry involvement. We analysed whether there were differences in study characteristics (including type of control, sample size, study phase, randomisation, registration timing, and purpose of study) by industry involvement. Results: Industry involvement was reported by 21% of the 1,433 included trials. Only 40% of trials with industry involvement used an active control compared to 58% of non-industry trials (OR = 0.49, 95%CI = 0.38 to 0.63, p

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Lene Seidler & Kylie E Hunter & Nicholas Chartres & Lisa M Askie, 2019. "Associations between industry involvement and study characteristics at the time of trial registration in biomedical research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-12, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0222117
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222117
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0222117
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0222117&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0222117?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barnes, Deborah & Bero, Lisa A. Ph.D., 1997. "Scientific Quality of Original Research Articles on Environmental Tobacco Smoke," University of California at San Francisco, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education qt5tk8j863, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, UC San Francisco.
    2. Lisa Bero & Fieke Oostvogel & Peter Bacchetti & Kirby Lee, 2007. "Factors Associated with Findings of Published Trials of Drug–Drug Comparisons: Why Some Statins Appear More Efficacious than Others," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(6), pages 1-10, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David Krauth & Andrew Anglemyer & Rose Philipps & Lisa Bero, 2014. "Nonindustry-Sponsored Preclinical Studies on Statins Yield Greater Efficacy Estimates Than Industry-Sponsored Studies: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-10, January.
    2. Daniel M Cook & Elizabeth A Boyd & Claudia Grossmann & Lisa A Bero, 2007. "Reporting Science and Conflicts of Interest in the Lay Press," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(12), pages 1-5, December.
    3. Antoine Popelut & Fabien Valet & Olivier Fromentin & Aurélie Thomas & Philippe Bouchard, 2010. "Relationship between Sponsorship and Failure Rate of Dental Implants: A Systematic Approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(4), pages 1-9, April.
    4. Schick, Suzaynn & Glantz, Stanton A. Ph.D., 2005. "Philip Morris toxicological experiments with fresh sidestream smoke: more toxic than mainstream smoke," University of California at San Francisco, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education qt54b9m1sb, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, UC San Francisco.
    5. Benhur Ruqsana, 2019. "The Impact of Source of Funding on the Outcome of Clinical Trials in India," Arthaniti: Journal of Economic Theory and Practice, , vol. 18(2), pages 201-216, December.
    6. Ferrán Catalá-López & Gabriel Sanfélix-Gimeno & Manuel Ridao & Salvador Peiró, 2013. "When Are Statins Cost-Effective in Cardiovascular Prevention? A Systematic Review of Sponsorship Bias and Conclusions in Economic Evaluations of Statins," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(7), pages 1-1, July.
    7. Lexchin, Joel & O'Donovan, Orla, 2010. "Prohibiting or 'managing' conflict of interest? A review of policies and procedures in three European drug regulation agencies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(5), pages 643-647, March.
    8. Ferrán Catalá-López & Adolfo Alonso-Arroyo & Rafael Aleixandre-Benavent & Manuel Ridao & Máxima Bolaños & Anna García-Altés & Gabriel Sanfélix-Gimeno & Salvador Peiró, 2012. "Coauthorship and Institutional Collaborations on Cost-Effectiveness Analyses: A Systematic Network Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(5), pages 1-9, May.
    9. Rima Nakkash & Ahmed Ali & Hala Alaouie & Khalil Asmar & Norbert Hirschhorn & Sanaa Mugharbil & Iman Nuwayhid & Leslie London & Amina Saban & Sabina Faiz Rashid & Md Koushik Ahmed & Cecile Knai & Char, 2020. "Attitudes and practices of public health academics towards research funding from for-profit organizations: cross-sectional survey," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 65(7), pages 1133-1145, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0222117. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.