Reporting of informed consent and ethics committee approval in clinical trials.

CONTEXT To determine whether journals have improved their disclosure of ethical protections in clinical trials. METHODS Comparison of clinical trials published before and after 1997 (July 1995 to December 1996 and January 1998 to June 1999) in Annals of Internal Medicine, BMJ, JAMA, The Lancet, and The New England Journal of Medicine. Sixty articles per journal per period were randomly selected and assessed for rate of reporting on informed consent and on ethics committee approval. RESULTS Informed consent was not described in 79 articles (26%) published before 1997 vs 53 (18%) published after 1997 (P =.01), and ethics committee approval was not mentioned in 93 (31%) before 1997 vs 54 (18%) after 1997 (P<.001). Neither protection was described in 48 articles (16%) published before 1997 vs 28 (9%) after 1997 (P =.01). In subgroup analyses, those journals with the worst initial rates generally improved the most. BMJ did not describe informed consent in 25 articles (42%) before 1997 vs 15 (25%) after 1997 (P =.05), and JAMA did not describe ethics committee approval in 25 (42%) before 1997 vs 13 (22%) after 1997 (P =.02). BMJ, JAMA, and Annals had the lowest initial rates of reporting on both protections in the same article, with 25 (42%), 32 (53%), and 34 (57%), respectively, but improved markedly to 38 (63%), 43 (72%), and 45 (75%) (P =.02,.04, and.03, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Major medical journals have improved their reporting on informed consent and ethics committee approval; however, 9% of studies still report neither.

[1]  M. Martínez-González,et al.  Methodological quality and reporting of ethical requirements in clinical trials , 2001, Journal of medical ethics.

[2]  C. Olson,et al.  Reporting approval by research ethics committees and subjects' consent in human resuscitation research. , 1996, Resuscitation.

[3]  SCIENTIA MAGNA,et al.  Information for Authors , 2007, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[4]  D. Rennie,et al.  Disclosure to the reader of institutional review board approval and informed consent. , 1997, JAMA.

[5]  H. Bauchner,et al.  Failure to report ethical approval in child health research: review of published papers , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[6]  D. Moher,et al.  Redundancy, disaggregation, and the integrity of medical research , 1996, The Lancet.

[7]  M. Radeos,et al.  Variation in institutional review board responses to a standard protocol for a multicenter clinical trial. , 2001, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[8]  R. Amdur,et al.  Institutional review board approval and publication of human research results. , 1997, JAMA.

[9]  M. Martínez-González,et al.  Informed consent and approval by institutional review boards in published reports on clinical trials. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[10]  Louette R. Johnson Lutjens.  Research , 2006 .

[11]  P. Gøtzsche,et al.  Multiple publication of reports of drug trials , 2004, European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology.

[12]  M. Tramèr,et al.  Impact of covert duplicate publication on meta-analysis: a case study , 1997, BMJ.

[13]  D. Shalala,et al.  Protecting research subjects--what must be done. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[14]  R. Kelch.  Maintaining the public trust in clinical research. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  C. Sprung,et al.  Evaluation of Institutional Review Board review and informed consent in publications of human research in critical care medicine. , 1998, Critical care medicine.

[16]  W. Hoefnagels,et al.  Informed consent in biomedical studies on aging: survey of four journals , 1996, BMJ.

[17]  A. Macfarlane,et al.  Ethics approval for a national postal survey: recent experience , 1995, BMJ.