Opportunities for selective reporting of harms in randomized clinical trials: Selection criteria for non-systematic adverse events

被引:23
|
作者
Mayo-Wilson, Evan [1 ]
Fusco, Nicole [1 ]
Hong, Hwanhee [2 ]
Li, Tianjing [1 ]
Canner, Joseph K. [3 ]
Dickersin, Kay [1 ]
机构
[1] Indiana Univ, Sch Publ Hlth Bloomington, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, 1025 E 7th St,179D, Bloomington, IN 47405 USA
[2] Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Mental Hlth, 624 N Broadway,Hampton House, Baltimore, MD 21205 USA
[3] Johns Hopkins Sch Med, Dept Surg, 600 North Wolfe St,Blalock 1202, Baltimore, MD 21287 USA
关键词
Harms; Adverse events; Clinical trials; Reporting bias; Selective outcome reporting; Data sharing; Trial registration; CLINICALTRIALS.GOV RESULTS DATABASE; EUROPEAN MEDICINES AGENCY; BIAS; RECOMMENDATIONS; OUTCOMES; ACCESS;
D O I
10.1186/s13063-019-3581-3
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
Background Adverse events (AEs) in clinical trials may be reported in multiple sources. Different methods for reporting adverse events across trials or across sources for a single trial may produce inconsistent information about the adverse events associated with interventions. Methods We compared the methods authors use to decide which AEs to include in a particular source (i.e., "selection criteria"), including the number of different types of AEs reported (i.e., rather than the number of events). We compared sources (e.g., journal articles, clinical study reports (CSRs)) of trials for two drug-indications-gabapentin for neuropathic pain and quetiapine for bipolar depression. Electronic searches were completed in 2015. We identified selection criteria and assessed how criteria affected AE reporting. Results We identified 21 gabapentin and 7 quetiapine trials. We found 6 gabapentin CSRs and 2 quetiapine CSRs, all written by drug manufacturers. All CSRs reported all AEs without applying selection criteria; by comparison, no other source reported all AEs, and 15/68 (22%) gabapentin sources and 19/48 (40%) quetiapine sources reported using selection criteria. Selection criteria greatly affected the number of AEs reported. For example, 67/316 (21%) AEs in one quetiapine trial met the criterion "occurring in >= 2% of participants in any treatment group," while only 5/316 (2%) AEs met the criterion "occurring in >= 10% of quetiapine-treated patients and twice as frequent in the quetiapine group as the placebo group." Conclusions Selection criteria for reporting AEs vary across trials and across sources for individual trials. If investigators do not pre-specify selection criteria, they might "cherry-pick" AEs based on results. Even if investigators pre-specify selection criteria, selective reporting will produce biased meta-analyses and clinical practice guidelines. Data about all AEs identified in clinical trials should be publicly available; however, sharing data will not solve all the problems identified in this study.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Opportunities for selective reporting of harms in randomized clinical trials: Selection criteria for non-systematic adverse events
    Evan Mayo-Wilson
    Nicole Fusco
    Hwanhee Hong
    Tianjing Li
    Joseph K. Canner
    Kay Dickersin
    [J]. Trials, 20
  • [2] Adverse Events Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials of COVID-19 Vaccine Using the CONSORT Criteria for Reporting Harms: A Systematic Review
    Yuniar, Cindra Tri
    Pratiwi, Bhekti
    Ihsan, Ardika Fajrul
    Laksono, Bambang Tri
    Risfayanti, Iffa
    Fathadina, Annisa
    Jeong, Yeonseon
    Kim, Eunyoung
    [J]. VACCINES, 2022, 10 (02)
  • [3] Reporting of adverse events in randomised controlled trials of antiepileptic drugs using the CONSORT criteria for reporting harms
    Shukralla, Arif A.
    Tudur-Smith, Catrin
    Powell, Graham A.
    Williamson, Paula R.
    Marson, Anthony G.
    [J]. EPILEPSY RESEARCH, 2011, 97 (1-2) : 20 - 29
  • [4] Reporting adverse events in randomized controlled trials in periodontology: a systematic review
    Faggion, Clovis M., Jr.
    Tu, Yu-Kang
    Giannakopoulos, Nikolaos N.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY, 2013, 40 (09) : 889 - 895
  • [5] The reporting of adverse events following spinal manipulation in randomized clinical trials-a systematic review
    Gorrell, Lindsay M.
    Engel, Roger M.
    Brown, Benjamin
    Lystad, Reidar P.
    [J]. SPINE JOURNAL, 2016, 16 (09): : 1143 - 1151
  • [6] The reporting of adverse events associated with spinal manipulation in randomized clinical trials: an updated systematic review
    Gorrell, Lindsay M.
    Brown, Benjamin T.
    Engel, Roger
    Lystad, Reidar P.
    [J]. BMJ OPEN, 2024, 14 (01):
  • [7] Systematic review of reporting benefits and harms of surgical interventions in randomized clinical trials
    Stubenrouch, F. E.
    Cohen, E. S.
    Bossuyt, P. M. M.
    Koelemay, M. J. W.
    van der Vet, P. C. R.
    Ubbink, D. T.
    [J]. BJS OPEN, 2020, 4 (02): : 171 - 181
  • [8] Reporting adverse events in randomized controlled trials
    Nuovo, Jim
    Sather, Curtis
    [J]. PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, 2007, 16 (03) : 349 - 351
  • [9] Reporting Adverse Events in Plastic Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Morzycki, Alexander D.
    Hudson, Alexandra S.
    Samargandi, Osama A.
    Bezuhly, Michael
    Williams, Jason G.
    [J]. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2019, 143 (01) : 199E - 208E
  • [10] The Reporting of Harms in Randomized Controlled Trials of Hypertension Using the CONSORT Criteria for Harm Reporting
    Bagul, Nitin Babulal
    Kirkham, Jamie J.
    [J]. CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL HYPERTENSION, 2012, 34 (08) : 548 - 554