Abstract
Objective Prospective registration has been widely implemented and accepted as a best practice in clinical research, but retrospective registration is still commonly found. We assessed to what extent retrospective registration is reported transparently in journal publications, and investigated factors associated with transparent reporting.
Design We used a dataset of trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov or Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien, with a German University Medical Center as the lead center, completed 2009–2017, and with a corresponding peer-reviewed results publication. We extracted all registration statements from results publications of retrospectively registered trials and assessed whether they mention or justify the retrospective registration. We analyzed associations of retrospective registration and reporting thereof with registration number reporting, International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) membership/-following and industry sponsorship using chi-squared or Fisher exact test.
Results In the dataset of 1927 trials with a corresponding results publication, 956 (53.7%) were retrospectively registered. Of those, 2.2% (21) explicitly report the retrospective registration in the abstract and 3.5% (33) in the full text. In 2.1% (20) of publications, authors provide an explanation for the retrospective registration in the full text. Registration numbers were significantly underreported in abstracts of retrospectively registered trials compared to prospectively registered trials. Publications in ICMJE member journals did not have statistically significantly higher rates of both prospective registration and disclosure of retrospective registration, and publications in journals claiming to follow ICMJE recommendations showed statistically significantly lower rates compared to non-ICMJE-following journals. Industry sponsorship of trials was significantly associated with higher rates of prospective registration, but not with transparent registration reporting.
Conclusions Contrary to ICMJE guidance, retrospective registration is disclosed and explained only in a small number of retrospectively registered studies. Disclosure of the retrospective nature of the registration would require a brief statement in the manuscript and could be easily implemented by journals.
Strengths and limitations of this study
We use a large, high-quality dataset of all trials conducted at German university medical centers and registered in two registries, with results publications determined by an extensive manual screening process.
We consider a period of nine years (2009 – 2017) and describe the development of reporting practices over time
This study only includes trials led by German university medical centers, reflecting German regulatory standards.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was partly funded under a grant from the Federal Ministry of Education and Research of Germany (Bundesministerium fuer Bildung und Forschung - BMBF) [01PW18012]. The funder was not involved in the study design, data collection, analysis, or interpretation, writing of the manuscript, or the decision to submit for publication.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
stefanie.gestrich{at}charite.de
daniel.strech{at}bih-charite.de
Various changes to the manuscript made during review. Figures moved to the end of the manuscript.
Data Availability
All code and the data for this study are available at https://github.com/mhaslberger/retrospective-registration. Data are also available in an OSF repository (https://osf.io/8g5cf/).
