Utilization of Clinical Trials Registries in Obstetrics and Gynecology Systematic Reviews

Michael E. Bibens · Alberto Benjamin Chong · Matt B. Vassar

22 citations0/0 files storedObstetrics and Gynecology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Meta-analysis and systematic reviews Academic Publishing and Open Access Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use of clinical trials registries in published obstetrics and gynecologic systematic reviews and meta-analyses. METHODS: We performed a metaepidemiologic study of systematic reviews between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2015, from six obstetric and gynecologic journals (Obstetrics & Gynecology, Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey, Human Reproduction Update, Gynecologic Oncology, British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, and American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology). All systematic reviews included after exclusions were independently reviewed to determine whether clinical trials registries had been included as part of the search process. Studies that reported using a trials registry were further examined to determine whether trial data were included in the analysis of these systematic reviews. RESULTS: Our initial search resulted in 292 articles, which was narrowed to 256 after exclusions. Of the 256 systematic reviews meeting our selection criteria, 47 (18.4%) used a clinical trials registry. Eleven of the 47 (23.4%) systematic reviews found unpublished data and two included unpublished data in their results. CONCLUSION: A majority of systematic reviews in clinical obstetrics and gynecology journals do not conduct searches of clinical trials registries or do not make use of data obtained from these searches. Failure to make use of such data may lead to an inaccurate summary of available evidence and may contribute to an overrepresentation of published, statistically significant outcomes.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 22 citations exist upstream.

References

1990The Existence of Publication Bias and Risk Factors for Its Occurrence 2004Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: analytical survey 2007Assessment of funnel plot asymmetry and publication bias in reproductive health meta-analyses: an analytic survey 2014Publication bias is underreported in systematic reviews published in high-impact-factor journals: metaepidemiologic study 2014Clinical trials registries are under-utilized in the conduct of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional analysis

Cited by

2017Manual search approaches used by systematic reviewers in dermatology 2021Clinical Trial Registry Use in Orthopaedic Surgery Systematic Reviews 2022Impact of searching clinical trials registers in systematic reviews of pharmaceutical and non‐pharmaceutical interventions: Reanalysis of meta‐analyses 2019Trial Registry Use in Surgery Systematic Reviews: A Cross-Sectional Study 2019Comparison of information sources used in Cochrane and non‐Cochrane systematic reviews: A case study in the field of anesthesiology and pain 2016Clinical trials registries are underused in the pregnancy and childbirth literature: a systematic review of the top 20 journals 2021

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.