Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Trial registration of abstracts from the American Society of Anesthesiologists Meetings 2010-2016: A review of prospective trial registration and selective outcome reporting.
Austin Authors: Chong, Simon W;Imberger, Georgina;Karahalios, Amalia;Wang, Andrew;Burggraf, Millicent;Louis, Maleck ;Liskaser, Grace M;Bianco, Anthony;Peyton, Philip J 
Affiliation: The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Australia
Department of Anaesthesia, Pain and Perioperative Medicine, Western Health, Melbourne, Australia
Department of Critical Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
Issue Date: 2022
Date: 2022
Publication information: PloS one 2022; 17(7): e0270841
Abstract: Mandatory prospective trial registration was introduced in 2005 to reduce publication bias and selective outcome reporting. In this study, we measured the proportion of prospective trial registration in randomized controlled trials in the anesthesia literature after this introduction, discrepancies between these trial protocols and subsequent publications, the association between being prospectively registered and reporting positive or negative results, and between being prospectively registered and achieving publication. We reviewed all abstracts from the American Society of Anesthesiologists annual meetings between 2010-2016 and included randomized controlled trials in humans. The abstract conclusions were scored as positive or negative according to predetermined definitions. We conducted a systematic search for trial registration and subsequent publication. Of the 9789 abstracts reviewed, 1070 abstracts were included. 222 (21%) of these abstracts had undergone prospective trial registration. 168/222 (76%) had a corresponding journal publication. 81(48%) had a major discrepancy between registration and publication. 149 (67%) of the abstracts with registration had positive outcomes compared with 616 (73%) of those without (Odds Ratio 0.77; 95% CI: 0.56 to 1.06; P = 0.105). Abstracts that had been registered were more likely to proceed to publication than those that had not (Odds Ratio 3.82; 95% CI 2.73 to 5.35; P < 0.001). The proportion of randomized controlled trials being prospectively registered in anesthesia remains low. Discrepancies between registry entries and corresponding journal publications are common. There was no association between prospective trial registration and subsequent positive outcomes. There was a strong association between prospective trial registration and the likelihood of progression to journal publication.
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0270841
ORCID: 0000-0003-3696-6926
Journal: PloS one
PubMed URL: 35788577
Type: Journal Article
Appears in Collections:Journal articles

Show full item record

Page view(s)

checked on Sep 27, 2023

Google ScholarTM


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.