When considering which databases and other information sources to search as part of the methodology for a systematic review (SR) project, SR team members often must decide how comprehensive they wish to be in their efforts to maximize the discovery of clinical trial results.
In the March 30, 2023 issue of JAMA, a research letter entitled Comparison of Availability of Trial Results in ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed by Data Source and Funder Type “examines the dissemination and timing of trial results by data source (i.e., ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed) and funder type (i.e., NIH, non-NIH U.S. federal agency, industry, and other).”
See:
Nelson JT, Tse T, Puplampu-Dove Y, Golfinopoulos E, Zarin DA. Comparison of Availability of Trial Results in ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed by Data Source and Funder Type. JAMA. 2023 Mar 30:e232351. doi: 10.1001/jama.2023.2351. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 36995689; PMCID: PMC10064282.
Key takeaway from this study:
“In this study, 39% of trials lacked results availability on ClinicalTrials.gov or PubMed after a minimum follow-up of 36 months following primary completion date. Nearly a quarter of all identified trial results were solely available on ClinicalTrials.gov, and 40% with available results were first available on ClinicalTrials.gov. Consistent with prior work, these findings suggest that searching both ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed maximizes discovery of trial results.”
In addition to searching the clinical trial registry records directly from their respective native interfaces, for example, ClinicalTrials.gov or the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), records from these sources are also included in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) database, which is included as part of the Cochrane Library.
Learn more about the MSK Library’s Systematic Review Service or Ask Us at the MSK Library if you have any questions.
