Cargando…

Avoidable waste of research related to inadequate methods in clinical trials

Objective To assess the waste of research related to inadequate methods in trials included in Cochrane reviews and to examine to what extent this waste could be avoided. A secondary objective was to perform a simulation study to re-estimate this avoidable waste if all trials were adequately reported...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yordanov, Youri, Dechartres, Agnes, Porcher, Raphaël, Boutron, Isabelle, Altman, Douglas G, Ravaud, Philippe
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4372296/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25804210
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h809
_version_ 1782363155876282368
author Yordanov, Youri
Dechartres, Agnes
Porcher, Raphaël
Boutron, Isabelle
Altman, Douglas G
Ravaud, Philippe
author_facet Yordanov, Youri
Dechartres, Agnes
Porcher, Raphaël
Boutron, Isabelle
Altman, Douglas G
Ravaud, Philippe
author_sort Yordanov, Youri
collection PubMed
description Objective To assess the waste of research related to inadequate methods in trials included in Cochrane reviews and to examine to what extent this waste could be avoided. A secondary objective was to perform a simulation study to re-estimate this avoidable waste if all trials were adequately reported. Design Methodological review and simulation study. Data sources Trials included in the meta-analysis of the primary outcome of Cochrane reviews published between April 2012 and March 2013. Data extraction and synthesis We collected the risk of bias assessment made by the review authors for each trial. For a random sample of 200 trials with at least one domain at high risk of bias, we re-assessed risk of bias and identified all related methodological problems. For each problem, possible adjustments were proposed that were then validated by an expert panel also evaluating their feasibility (easy or not) and cost. Avoidable waste was defined as trials with at least one domain at high risk of bias for which easy adjustments with no or minor cost could change all domains to low risk. In the simulation study, after extrapolating our re-assessment of risk of bias to all trials, we considered each domain rated as unclear risk of bias as missing data and used multiple imputations to determine whether they were at high or low risk. Results Of 1286 trials from 205 meta-analyses, 556 (43%) had at least one domain at high risk of bias. Among the sample of 200 of these trials, 142 were confirmed as high risk; in these, we identified 25 types of methodological problem. Adjustments were possible in 136 trials (96%). Easy adjustments with no or minor cost could be applied in 71 trials (50%), resulting in 17 trials (12%) changing to low risk for all domains. So the avoidable waste represented 12% (95% CI 7% to 18%) of trials with at least one domain at high risk. After correcting for incomplete reporting, avoidable waste due to inadequate methods was estimated at 42% (95% CI 36% to 49%). Conclusions An important burden of wasted research is related to inadequate methods. This waste could be partly avoided by simple and inexpensive adjustments.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4372296
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43722962015-04-01 Avoidable waste of research related to inadequate methods in clinical trials Yordanov, Youri Dechartres, Agnes Porcher, Raphaël Boutron, Isabelle Altman, Douglas G Ravaud, Philippe BMJ Research Objective To assess the waste of research related to inadequate methods in trials included in Cochrane reviews and to examine to what extent this waste could be avoided. A secondary objective was to perform a simulation study to re-estimate this avoidable waste if all trials were adequately reported. Design Methodological review and simulation study. Data sources Trials included in the meta-analysis of the primary outcome of Cochrane reviews published between April 2012 and March 2013. Data extraction and synthesis We collected the risk of bias assessment made by the review authors for each trial. For a random sample of 200 trials with at least one domain at high risk of bias, we re-assessed risk of bias and identified all related methodological problems. For each problem, possible adjustments were proposed that were then validated by an expert panel also evaluating their feasibility (easy or not) and cost. Avoidable waste was defined as trials with at least one domain at high risk of bias for which easy adjustments with no or minor cost could change all domains to low risk. In the simulation study, after extrapolating our re-assessment of risk of bias to all trials, we considered each domain rated as unclear risk of bias as missing data and used multiple imputations to determine whether they were at high or low risk. Results Of 1286 trials from 205 meta-analyses, 556 (43%) had at least one domain at high risk of bias. Among the sample of 200 of these trials, 142 were confirmed as high risk; in these, we identified 25 types of methodological problem. Adjustments were possible in 136 trials (96%). Easy adjustments with no or minor cost could be applied in 71 trials (50%), resulting in 17 trials (12%) changing to low risk for all domains. So the avoidable waste represented 12% (95% CI 7% to 18%) of trials with at least one domain at high risk. After correcting for incomplete reporting, avoidable waste due to inadequate methods was estimated at 42% (95% CI 36% to 49%). Conclusions An important burden of wasted research is related to inadequate methods. This waste could be partly avoided by simple and inexpensive adjustments. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2015-03-24 /pmc/articles/PMC4372296/ /pubmed/25804210 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h809 Text en © Yordanov et al 2015 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Research
Yordanov, Youri
Dechartres, Agnes
Porcher, Raphaël
Boutron, Isabelle
Altman, Douglas G
Ravaud, Philippe
Avoidable waste of research related to inadequate methods in clinical trials
title Avoidable waste of research related to inadequate methods in clinical trials
title_full Avoidable waste of research related to inadequate methods in clinical trials
title_fullStr Avoidable waste of research related to inadequate methods in clinical trials
title_full_unstemmed Avoidable waste of research related to inadequate methods in clinical trials
title_short Avoidable waste of research related to inadequate methods in clinical trials
title_sort avoidable waste of research related to inadequate methods in clinical trials
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4372296/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25804210
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h809
work_keys_str_mv AT yordanovyouri avoidablewasteofresearchrelatedtoinadequatemethodsinclinicaltrials
AT dechartresagnes avoidablewasteofresearchrelatedtoinadequatemethodsinclinicaltrials
AT porcherraphael avoidablewasteofresearchrelatedtoinadequatemethodsinclinicaltrials
AT boutronisabelle avoidablewasteofresearchrelatedtoinadequatemethodsinclinicaltrials
AT altmandouglasg avoidablewasteofresearchrelatedtoinadequatemethodsinclinicaltrials
AT ravaudphilippe avoidablewasteofresearchrelatedtoinadequatemethodsinclinicaltrials