Comparing the Clinical Trial Characteristics of Industry-Funded Trials and Non Industry-Funded Trials.

IF 1.6 4区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-16 DOI:10.1017/jme.2024.135
Emily Hughes, Tamara Van Bakel, Ashley Raudanskis, Prachi Ray, Benazir Hodzic-Santor, Ushma Purohit, Chana A Sacks, Michael Fralick
{"title":"Comparing the Clinical Trial Characteristics of Industry-Funded Trials and Non Industry-Funded Trials.","authors":"Emily Hughes, Tamara Van Bakel, Ashley Raudanskis, Prachi Ray, Benazir Hodzic-Santor, Ushma Purohit, Chana A Sacks, Michael Fralick","doi":"10.1017/jme.2024.135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We compared study characteristics of randomized controlled trials funded by industry (N=697) to those not funded by industry (N=835). RCTs published in high-impact journals are more likely to be blinded, more likely to include a placebo, and more likely to post trial results on ClinicalTrials.gov. Our findings emphasize the importance of evaluating the quality of an RCT based on its methodological rigor, not its funder type.</p>","PeriodicalId":50165,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics","volume":"52 3","pages":"693-700"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jme.2024.135","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We compared study characteristics of randomized controlled trials funded by industry (N=697) to those not funded by industry (N=835). RCTs published in high-impact journals are more likely to be blinded, more likely to include a placebo, and more likely to post trial results on ClinicalTrials.gov. Our findings emphasize the importance of evaluating the quality of an RCT based on its methodological rigor, not its funder type.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较行业资助试验和非行业资助试验的临床试验特征。
我们比较了由工业界资助的随机对照试验(N=697)和非工业界资助的随机对照试验(N=835)的研究特征。发表在高影响力期刊上的随机对照试验更有可能是盲法的,更有可能包括安慰剂,更有可能在ClinicalTrials.gov上发布试验结果。我们的研究结果强调了评估随机对照试验质量的重要性,其依据是方法的严谨性,而不是资助者的类型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics
Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics 医学-医学:法
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
4.80%
发文量
70
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Material published in The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics (JLME) contributes to the educational mission of The American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, covering public health, health disparities, patient safety and quality of care, and biomedical science and research. It provides articles on such timely topics as health care quality and access, managed care, pain relief, genetics, child/maternal health, reproductive health, informed consent, assisted dying, ethics committees, HIV/AIDS, and public health. Symposium issues review significant policy developments, health law court decisions, and books.
期刊最新文献
Strengthening Global Health Security Under the Biden-Harris Administration. Challenges for the Pro-Life Movement in a Post-Roe Era - ERRATUM. INTRODUCTION: Medical-Legal Partnerships: Equity, Evolution, and Evaluation - CORRIGENDUM. "A Most Equitable Drug": How the Clinical Studies of Convalescent Plasma as a Treatment for SARS-CoV-2 Might Usefully Inform Post-Pandemic Public Sector Approaches to Drug Development. A Federally Qualified Health Center-led Ethics & Equity Framework & Workflow Checklist: An Invited Commentary in Response to a Relational Public Health Framing of FQHCs During COVID-19.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1