Cargando…

Inadequate reporting of research ethics review and informed consent in cluster randomised trials: review of random sample of published trials

Objectives To investigate the extent to which authors of cluster randomised trials adhered to two basic requirements of the World Medical Association’s Declaration of Helsinki and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors’ uniform requirements for manuscripts (namely, reporting of resea...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Taljaard, Monica, McRae, Andrew D, Weijer, Charles, Bennett, Carol, Dixon, Stephanie, Taleban, Julia, Skea, Zoe, Eccles, Martin P, Brehaut, Jamie C, Donner, Allan, Saginur, Raphael, Boruch, Robert F, Grimshaw, Jeremy M
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092521/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21562003
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d2496
_version_ 1782203380973699072
author Taljaard, Monica
McRae, Andrew D
Weijer, Charles
Bennett, Carol
Dixon, Stephanie
Taleban, Julia
Skea, Zoe
Eccles, Martin P
Brehaut, Jamie C
Donner, Allan
Saginur, Raphael
Boruch, Robert F
Grimshaw, Jeremy M
author_facet Taljaard, Monica
McRae, Andrew D
Weijer, Charles
Bennett, Carol
Dixon, Stephanie
Taleban, Julia
Skea, Zoe
Eccles, Martin P
Brehaut, Jamie C
Donner, Allan
Saginur, Raphael
Boruch, Robert F
Grimshaw, Jeremy M
author_sort Taljaard, Monica
collection PubMed
description Objectives To investigate the extent to which authors of cluster randomised trials adhered to two basic requirements of the World Medical Association’s Declaration of Helsinki and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors’ uniform requirements for manuscripts (namely, reporting of research ethics review and informed consent), to determine whether the adequacy of reporting has improved over time, and to identify characteristics of cluster randomised trials associated with reporting of ethics practices. Design Review of a random sample of published cluster randomised trials from an electronic search in Medline. Setting Cluster randomised trials in health research published in English language journals from 2000 to 2008. Study sample 300 cluster randomised trials published in 150 journals. Results 77 (26%, 95% confidence interval 21% to 31%) trials failed to report ethics review. The proportion reporting ethics review increased significantly over time (P<0.001). Trials with data collection interventions at the individual level were more likely to report ethics review than were trials that used routine data sources only (79% (n=151) v 55% (23); P=0.008). Trials that accounted for clustering in the design and analysis were more likely to report ethics review. The median impact factor of the journal of publication was higher for trials that reported ethics review (3.4 v 2.3; P<0.001). 93 (31%, 26% to 36%) trials failed to report consent. Reporting of consent increased significantly over time (P<0.001). Trials with interventions targeting participants at the individual level were more likely to report consent than were trials with interventions targeting the cluster level (87% (90) v 48% (41); P<0.001). Trials with data collection interventions at the individual level were more likely to report consent than were those that used routine data sources only (78% (146) v 29% (11); P<0.001). Conclusions Reporting of research ethics protections in cluster randomised trials is inadequate. In addition to research ethics approval, authors should report whether informed consent was sought, from whom consent was sought, and what consent was for.
format Text
id pubmed-3092521
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30925212011-05-19 Inadequate reporting of research ethics review and informed consent in cluster randomised trials: review of random sample of published trials Taljaard, Monica McRae, Andrew D Weijer, Charles Bennett, Carol Dixon, Stephanie Taleban, Julia Skea, Zoe Eccles, Martin P Brehaut, Jamie C Donner, Allan Saginur, Raphael Boruch, Robert F Grimshaw, Jeremy M BMJ Research Objectives To investigate the extent to which authors of cluster randomised trials adhered to two basic requirements of the World Medical Association’s Declaration of Helsinki and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors’ uniform requirements for manuscripts (namely, reporting of research ethics review and informed consent), to determine whether the adequacy of reporting has improved over time, and to identify characteristics of cluster randomised trials associated with reporting of ethics practices. Design Review of a random sample of published cluster randomised trials from an electronic search in Medline. Setting Cluster randomised trials in health research published in English language journals from 2000 to 2008. Study sample 300 cluster randomised trials published in 150 journals. Results 77 (26%, 95% confidence interval 21% to 31%) trials failed to report ethics review. The proportion reporting ethics review increased significantly over time (P<0.001). Trials with data collection interventions at the individual level were more likely to report ethics review than were trials that used routine data sources only (79% (n=151) v 55% (23); P=0.008). Trials that accounted for clustering in the design and analysis were more likely to report ethics review. The median impact factor of the journal of publication was higher for trials that reported ethics review (3.4 v 2.3; P<0.001). 93 (31%, 26% to 36%) trials failed to report consent. Reporting of consent increased significantly over time (P<0.001). Trials with interventions targeting participants at the individual level were more likely to report consent than were trials with interventions targeting the cluster level (87% (90) v 48% (41); P<0.001). Trials with data collection interventions at the individual level were more likely to report consent than were those that used routine data sources only (78% (146) v 29% (11); P<0.001). Conclusions Reporting of research ethics protections in cluster randomised trials is inadequate. In addition to research ethics approval, authors should report whether informed consent was sought, from whom consent was sought, and what consent was for. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2011-05-11 /pmc/articles/PMC3092521/ /pubmed/21562003 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d2496 Text en © Taljaard et al 2011 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode.
spellingShingle Research
Taljaard, Monica
McRae, Andrew D
Weijer, Charles
Bennett, Carol
Dixon, Stephanie
Taleban, Julia
Skea, Zoe
Eccles, Martin P
Brehaut, Jamie C
Donner, Allan
Saginur, Raphael
Boruch, Robert F
Grimshaw, Jeremy M
Inadequate reporting of research ethics review and informed consent in cluster randomised trials: review of random sample of published trials
title Inadequate reporting of research ethics review and informed consent in cluster randomised trials: review of random sample of published trials
title_full Inadequate reporting of research ethics review and informed consent in cluster randomised trials: review of random sample of published trials
title_fullStr Inadequate reporting of research ethics review and informed consent in cluster randomised trials: review of random sample of published trials
title_full_unstemmed Inadequate reporting of research ethics review and informed consent in cluster randomised trials: review of random sample of published trials
title_short Inadequate reporting of research ethics review and informed consent in cluster randomised trials: review of random sample of published trials
title_sort inadequate reporting of research ethics review and informed consent in cluster randomised trials: review of random sample of published trials
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092521/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21562003
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d2496
work_keys_str_mv AT taljaardmonica inadequatereportingofresearchethicsreviewandinformedconsentinclusterrandomisedtrialsreviewofrandomsampleofpublishedtrials
AT mcraeandrewd inadequatereportingofresearchethicsreviewandinformedconsentinclusterrandomisedtrialsreviewofrandomsampleofpublishedtrials
AT weijercharles inadequatereportingofresearchethicsreviewandinformedconsentinclusterrandomisedtrialsreviewofrandomsampleofpublishedtrials
AT bennettcarol inadequatereportingofresearchethicsreviewandinformedconsentinclusterrandomisedtrialsreviewofrandomsampleofpublishedtrials
AT dixonstephanie inadequatereportingofresearchethicsreviewandinformedconsentinclusterrandomisedtrialsreviewofrandomsampleofpublishedtrials
AT talebanjulia inadequatereportingofresearchethicsreviewandinformedconsentinclusterrandomisedtrialsreviewofrandomsampleofpublishedtrials
AT skeazoe inadequatereportingofresearchethicsreviewandinformedconsentinclusterrandomisedtrialsreviewofrandomsampleofpublishedtrials
AT ecclesmartinp inadequatereportingofresearchethicsreviewandinformedconsentinclusterrandomisedtrialsreviewofrandomsampleofpublishedtrials
AT brehautjamiec inadequatereportingofresearchethicsreviewandinformedconsentinclusterrandomisedtrialsreviewofrandomsampleofpublishedtrials
AT donnerallan inadequatereportingofresearchethicsreviewandinformedconsentinclusterrandomisedtrialsreviewofrandomsampleofpublishedtrials
AT saginurraphael inadequatereportingofresearchethicsreviewandinformedconsentinclusterrandomisedtrialsreviewofrandomsampleofpublishedtrials
AT boruchrobertf inadequatereportingofresearchethicsreviewandinformedconsentinclusterrandomisedtrialsreviewofrandomsampleofpublishedtrials
AT grimshawjeremym inadequatereportingofresearchethicsreviewandinformedconsentinclusterrandomisedtrialsreviewofrandomsampleofpublishedtrials