• Chang Xu, Shiqi Fan, Luis Furuya-Kanamori, Sheyu Li, Lifeng Lin, Haitao Chu, Su Golder, Yoon Loke, and Sunita Vohra.
• Proof of Concept Center, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Third Affiliated Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China. xuchang2016@runbox.com.
• Bmc Med. 2024 Oct 11; 22 (1): 450450.

BackgroundTrial registration aims to address potential bias from selective or non-reporting of findings, and therefore has a vital role in promoting transparency and accountability of clinical research. In this study, we aim to investigate the influence of trial registration on estimated harm effects in randomized controlled trials of medication interventions.MethodsWe searched PubMed for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized trials on medication harms indexed between January 1, 2015, and January 1, 2020. To be included in the analyses, eligible meta-analyses should have at least five randomized trials with distinct registration statuses (i.e., prospectively registered, retrospectively registered, and non-registered) and 2 by 2 table data for adverse events for each trial. To control for potential confounding, trials in each meta-analysis were analyzed within confounder-harmonized groups (e.g., dosage) identified using the Directed Acyclic Graph method. The harm estimates arising from the trials with different registration statuses were compared within the confounder-harmonized groups using hierarchical linear regression. Results are shown as ratio of odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsThe dataset consists of 629 meta-analyses of harms with 10,069 trials. Of these trials, 74.3% were registered, and 23.9% were not registered, and for those registered, 70.6% were prospectively registered, while 26.3% were retrospectively registered. In comparison to prospectively registered trials, both non-registered trials (ratio of OR = 0.82, 95%CI 0.68 to 0.98, P = 0.03) and retrospectively registered trials (ratio of OR = 0.75, 95%CI 0.66 to 0.86, P < 0.01) had lower OR for harms based on 69 and 126 confounders-harmonized groups. The OR of harms did not differ between retrospectively registered and non-registered trials (ratio of OR = 1.02, 95%CI 0.85 to 1.23, P = 0.83) based on 76 confounders-harmonized groups.ConclusionsMedication-related harms may be understated in non-registered trials, and there was no obvious evidence that retrospective registration had a demonstrable benefit in reducing such selective or absent reporting. Prospective registration is highly recommended for future trials.© 2024. The Author(s).

9 keywords...

hide…