Back
 Health  Vol.8 No.15 , December 2016
International Comparison of Data from International Clinical Trials Registry Platform-Registered Clinical Trials
Abstract: Objectives: Our aim was to clarify the study characteristics of countries that have registered clinical trials studies and to calculate the percentage of clinical trials that were registered in each country’s registry, and try to find and evaluate the factors determining that percentage. Design and Methods: The present study is a cross-sectional study using data from clinical trials registered from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2015. Only countries with more than 2000 registered trials were included for further study. Ten countries met that criterion: United States, Japan, Iran, Australia, New Zealand, China, India, Germany, United Kingdom, and Netherland. The percentage of clinical trials that were registered in each country’s registry was calculated, and the factors determining that percentage were sought and analyzed through an exploratory approach. Results: The chi-squared test of independence indicated that the rate of clinical trial registration significantly differed between countries. From the adjusted standardized residuals, the percentage of clinical trials that were registered in the country of origin was higher in the United States, India, Japan, and Australia/New Zealand than in the European Union and China. Conclusion: The United States requires that informed consent documents for clinical trials contain clinical trial registration numbers from ClinicalTrials.gov, which could be the reason for the extremely high percentage of registered clinical trials (94%). Since the European Union does not have this requirement, clinical trials conducted in the European Union do not have to be registered in the countries in which they are conducted.
Cite this paper: Fujii, H. , Yukawa, K. and Sato, H. (2016) International Comparison of Data from International Clinical Trials Registry Platform-Registered Clinical Trials. Health, 8, 1759-1765. doi: 10.4236/health.2016.815169.
References

[1]   Thiers, F.A., Sinskey, A.J. and Berndt, E.R. (2008) Trends in the Globalization of Clinical Trials. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 7, 13-14.
https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd2441

[2]   Barrios, C.H., Werutsky, G. and Martinez-Mesa, J. (2015) The Global Conduct of Cancer Clinical Trials: Challenges and Opportunities. American Society of Clinical Oncology. Educational Book, e132-139.
https://doi.org/10.14694/EdBook_AM.2015.35.e132

[3]   Atal, I., Trinquart, L., Porcher, R. and Ravaud, P. (2015) Differential Globalization of Industry- and Non-Industry-Sponsored Clinical Trials. PLoS One, 10, e0145122.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0145122

[4]   Murthy, S., Mandl, K.D. and Bourgeois, F.T. (2015) Industry-Sponsored Clinical Research outside High-Income Countries: An Empirical Analysis of Registered Clinical Trials from 2006 to 2013. Health Research Policy and Systems, 13, 28.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-015-0019-6

[5]   Bourgeois, F.T., Murthy, S. and Mandl, K.D. (2010) Outcome Reporting among Drug Trials Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov. Annals of Internal Medicine, 153,158-166.
https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-153-3-201008030-00006

[6]   Ross, J.S., Mulvey, G.K., Hines, E.M., Nissen, S.E. and Krumholz, H.M. (2009) Trial publication after Registration in ClinicalTrials.Gov: A Cross-Sectional Analysis. PLOS Medicine, 6, e1000144.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000144

 
 
Top