The effect of scientific misconduct on the results of clinical trials: A Delphi survey

被引:43
作者
Al-Marzouki, S [1 ]
Roberts, I [1 ]
Marshall, T [1 ]
Evans, S [1 ]
机构
[1] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Dept Epidemiol & Populat Hlth, London WC1B 3DP, England
关键词
scientific misconduct; clinical trial; Delphi survey;
D O I
10.1016/j.cct.2005.01.011
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 [基础医学];
摘要
Objectives: To discover what types of scientific misconduct are most likely to influence the results of a clinical trial. Design: Delphi survey of expert opinion with three rounds of consultation. Setting: Non-industry clinical trial "community". Participants: Experts identified from invitees to a previous MRC consultation on clinical trials. 32 out of the 40 experts approached agreed to participate. Results: We identified thirteen forms of scientific misconduct for which there was majority agreement (> 50%) that they would be likely or very likely to distort the results and majority agreement (> 50%) that they would be likely or very likely to occur. Of these, the over-interpretation of 'significant' findings in small trials, selective reporting and inappropriate subgroup analyses were the main themes. Conclusions: According to this expert group, the most important forms of scientific misconduct in clinical trials are selective reporting and the opportunistic use of the play of chance. Data fabrication and falsification were not rated highly because it was considered that these were unlikely to occur. Registration and publication of detailed clinical trial protocols could make an important contribution to preventing scientific misconduct. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:331 / 337
页数:7
相关论文
共 7 条
[1]
[Anonymous], CLIN TRIALS TOM
[2]
Erlandson D. A., 1993, DOING NATURALISTIC I
[3]
Linstone HA., 1975, The Delphi method: techniques and applications, V1st ed.
[4]
Nimmo W, 2000, P R COLL PHYS EDI S7, V30
[5]
Subgroup analysis, covariate adjustment and baseline comparisons in clinical trial reporting: current practice and problems [J].
Pocock, SJ ;
Assmann, SE ;
Enos, LE ;
Kasten, LE .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2002, 21 (19) :2917-2930
[6]
Reid N., 1988, Professional competence and quality assurance in the caring professions
[7]
Registration of trials and protocols [J].
Staessen, JA ;
Bianchi, G .
LANCET, 2003, 362 (9389) :1009-1010