Registration of randomized controlled trials in nursing journals

Richard Gray, Ashish Badnapurkar, Eman Hassanein, Donna Thomas, Laileah Barguir, Charley Baker, Martin Jones, Dan Bressington, Ellie Brown, Annie Topping

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

Abstract

Background
Trial registration helps minimize publication and reporting bias. In leading medical journals, 96% of published trials are registered. The aim of this study was to determine the proportion of randomized controlled trials published in key nursing journals that met criteria for timely registration.

Methods
We reviewed all RCTs published in three (two general, one mental health) nursing journals between August 2011 and September 2016. We classified the included trials as: 1. Not registered, 2. Registered but not reported in manuscript, 3. Registered retrospectively, 4. Registered prospectively (before the recruitment of the first subject into the trial). 5. Timely registration (as 4 but the trial identification number is reported in abstract).

Results
We identified 135 trials published in the three included journals. The majority (n = 78, 58%) were not registered. Thirty-three (24%) were retrospectively registered. Of the 24 (18%) trials that were prospectively registered, 11 (8%) met the criteria for timely registration.

Conclusions
There is an unacceptable difference in rates of trial registration between leading medical and nursing journals. Concerted effort is required by nurse researchers, reviewers and journal editors to ensure that all trials are registered in a timely way.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-7
Number of pages7
JournalResearch Integrity and Peer Review
Volume2
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 16 Jul 2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Registration of randomized controlled trials in nursing journals'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this