IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0233996.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trends in mental health clinical research: Characterizing the ClinicalTrials.gov registry from 2007–2018

Author

Listed:
  • Joshua R Wortzel
  • Brandon E Turner
  • Brannon T Weeks
  • Christopher Fragassi
  • Virginia Ramos
  • Thanh Truong
  • Desiree Li
  • Omar Sahak
  • Hochang Benjamin Lee

Abstract

While the epidemiologic burden of mental health disorders in the United States has been well described over the past decade, we know relatively little about trends in how these disorders are being studied through clinical research. We examined all US interventional mental health trials submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov between October 1, 2007 and April 30, 2018 to identify trends in trial characteristics, comparisons with non-mental health trials, and trial attributes associated with discontinuation and results reporting. International data were excluded to minimize potential confounding. Over this period, mental health and non-mental health trials grew at similar rates, though Industry and US government-funded trials declined and academic medical center/hospital/other (AMC/Hosp/Oth) funded trials grew faster in mental health research. The proportion of trials with safeguards against bias, including blinding and oversight by data monitoring committees (DMCs), decreased. This occurred during growth in the proportion of trials studying behavioral and non-pharmacological interventions, which often cannot be blinded and do not require DMC oversight. There was concurrent decline in pharmaceutical trials. There was significant growth in trials studying Non-DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-5) conditions (e.g. suicidality and wellness), as well as substance use, anxiety, and neurocognitive disorders. One in 12 trials was discontinued. Trial discontinuation was associated with industry and AMC/Hosp/Oth funders, pharmaceutical interventions, and lack of DMC oversight. Only 29.9% of completed trials reported results to the registry. Decreased results reporting was associated with behavioral interventions, phase 1 trials, and industry and AMC/Hosp/Oth funders. The main implications of these data are that funding is shifting away from traditional government and industry sources, there is increasing interest in non-pharmacological treatments and Non-DSM conditions, and there are changing norms in trial design characteristics regarding safeguards against bias. These trends can guide researchers and funding bodies when considering the trajectory of future mental health research.

Suggested Citation

  • Joshua R Wortzel & Brandon E Turner & Brannon T Weeks & Christopher Fragassi & Virginia Ramos & Thanh Truong & Desiree Li & Omar Sahak & Hochang Benjamin Lee, 2020. "Trends in mental health clinical research: Characterizing the ClinicalTrials.gov registry from 2007–2018," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-28, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0233996
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233996
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0233996
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0233996&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0233996?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
    ---><---

    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:pone00:0233996. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.