Suppr超能文献

一项关于医学院校与行业赞助商之间临床试验协议条款的全国性调查。

A national survey of provisions in clinical-trial agreements between medical schools and industry sponsors.

作者信息

Schulman Kevin A, Seils Damon M, Timbie Justin W, Sugarman Jeremy, Dame Lauren A, Weinfurt Kevin P, Mark Daniel B, Califf Robert M

机构信息

Center for Clinical and Genetic Economics, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.

出版信息

N Engl J Med. 2002 Oct 24;347(17):1335-41. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa020349.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Concerned about threats to the integrity of clinical trials in a research environment increasingly controlled by private interests, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) has issued revised guidelines for investigators' participation in the study design, access to data, and control over publication. It is unclear whether research conducted at academic institutions adheres to these new standards.

METHODS

From November 2001 through January 2002, we interviewed officials at U.S. medical schools about provisions in their institutions' agreements with industry sponsors of multicenter clinical trials. A subgroup of the respondents were also asked about coordinating-center agreements for such trials.

RESULTS

Of the 122 medical schools that are members of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 108 participated in the survey. The median number of site-level agreements executed per institution in the previous year was 103 (interquartile range, 50 to 210). Scores for compliance with a wide range of provisions--from ensuring that authors of reports on multicenter trials have access to all trial data (1 percent [interquartile range, 0 to 21]) to addressing the plan for data collection and monitoring (10 percent [interquartile range, 1 to 50])--demonstrated limited adherence to the standards embodied in the new ICMJE guidelines. Scores for coordinating-center agreements were somewhat higher for most survey items.

CONCLUSIONS

Academic institutions routinely engage in industry-sponsored research that fails to adhere to ICMJE guidelines regarding trial design, access to data, and publication rights. Our findings suggest that a reevaluation of the process of contracting for clinical research is urgently needed.

摘要

背景

鉴于在越来越受私人利益控制的研究环境中,临床试验的完整性受到威胁,国际医学期刊编辑委员会(ICMJE)发布了关于研究者参与研究设计、获取数据以及控制发表的修订指南。尚不清楚学术机构开展的研究是否遵循这些新标准。

方法

2001年11月至2002年1月,我们就美国医学院校与多中心临床试验行业赞助商签订的机构协议中的条款,采访了这些院校的官员。还询问了部分受访者关于此类试验的协调中心协议。

结果

在美国医学院校协会的122所医学院中,108所参与了调查。前一年每个机构执行的机构层面协议的中位数为103份(四分位间距为50至210份)。在从确保多中心试验报告的作者能够获取所有试验数据(1%[四分位间距为0至21%])到处理数据收集和监测计划(10%[四分位间距为1至50%])等一系列条款的合规得分表明,对ICMJE新指南所体现标准的遵循程度有限。大多数调查项目的协调中心协议得分略高。

结论

学术机构经常参与行业资助的研究,这些研究未遵循ICMJE关于试验设计、获取数据和发表权的指南。我们的研究结果表明,迫切需要重新评估临床研究的合同签订过程。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验