Khan Khalid Saeed, Fawzy Mohamed, Chien Patrick, Geary Michael, Bueno-Cavanillas Aurora, Nunez-Nunez Maria, Zamora Javier, Bedaiwy Mohamed, Serour Gamal, D'Hooghe Thomas, Pacey Allan, Andrews Jeff, Scott James R, Ball Elizabeth, Mahran Ali, Aboulghar Mohamed, Wasim Tayyiba, Abdelaleem Mahmoud, Maheshwari Abha, Odibo Anthony, Sallam Hassan, Grandi Giovanni, Zhang Jim, Fernández-Luna Juan Manuel, Jawid Shaukat Ali, Mignini Luciano E, Khalaf Yacoub
University of Granada, CIBERESP, Madrid, Spain.
IbnSina (Sohag), Banon (Assiut), Amshaj (Sohag), and Qena (Qena) IVF Centers, Egypt.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2025 Jun;169(3):1093-1115. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.16118. Epub 2025 Jan 31.
The number of retractions of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) following post-publication allegations of misconduct is increasing. To address this issue, we aimed to establish an international multistakeholder consensus on post-publication integrity concerns related to RCTs. After prospective registration (https://osf.io/njksm), we assembled a multidisciplinary stakeholder group comprising 48 participants from 18 countries across six continents, recruited using a curated list of journal editors and snowballing. An underpinning evidence synthesis collated 89 articles related to post-publication integrity concerns. Integrity statements related to RCTs created were subjected to anonymized two-round Delphi survey. A hybrid face-to-face-online consensus development meeting was convened to consolidate the consensus. The response rates of the two Delphi survey rounds were 65% (31/48) and 67% (32/ 48), respectively. There were 101 and 41 statements in the first and second Delphi rounds, respectively. After the two Delphi rounds and the consensus development meeting, consensus was achieved on 104 statements consolidated to 84 after merging, editing, and removing duplicates. This set of statements included general aspects (n = 9), journal instructions (n = 14), editorial and peer review (n = 7), correspondence and complaints (n = 4), investigations for integrity concerns (n = 16), decisions and sanctions (n = 9), critical appraisal guidance (n = 1), systematic reviews of RCTs (n = 8), and research recommendations (n = 16). In conclusion, this international multistakeholder consensus statement aimed to underpin policies for preventing post-publication integrity concerns in RCT publications and assist in improving investigations of misconduct allegations.
在发表后被指控存在不当行为的随机临床试验(RCT)撤稿数量正在增加。为解决这一问题,我们旨在就与RCT相关的发表后诚信问题达成国际多利益相关方共识。经过前瞻性注册(https://osf.io/njksm),我们组建了一个多学科利益相关方小组,由来自六大洲18个国家的48名参与者组成,通过精心挑选的期刊编辑名单和滚雪球式方法招募。一项基础证据综合整理了89篇与发表后诚信问题相关的文章。针对所创建的与RCT相关的诚信声明进行了两轮匿名德尔菲调查。召开了一次线上线下相结合的共识发展会议以巩固共识。两轮德尔菲调查的回复率分别为65%(31/48)和67%(32/48)。第一轮和第二轮德尔菲调查分别有101条和41条声明。经过两轮德尔菲调查和共识发展会议,就104条声明达成了共识,合并、编辑和去除重复内容后整合为84条。这组声明包括一般方面(n = 9)、期刊说明(n = 14)、编辑和同行评审(n = 7)、通信与投诉(n = 4)、诚信问题调查(n = 16)、决策与制裁(n = 9)、批判性评价指南(n = 1)、RCT的系统评价(n = 8)以及研究建议(n = 16)。总之,这份国际多利益相关方共识声明旨在为防止RCT出版物发表后出现诚信问题的政策提供支持,并协助改进对不当行为指控的调查。