Reported Outcomes in Major Cardiovascular Clinical Trials Funded by for-Profit and Not-for-Profit Organization: 2000-2005
Ridker, Paul M.
JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association 2006 May 17; 295(19): 2270-2274
CONTEXT: In surveys based on data available prior to 2000, clinical trials funded by for-profit organizations appeared more likely to report positive findings than those funded by not-for-profit organizations. Whether this situation has changed over the past 5 years or whether similar effects are present among jointly funded trials is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine in contemporary randomized cardiovascular trials the association between funding source and the likelihood of reporting positive findings. DESIGN: We reviewed 324 consecutive superiority trials of cardiovascular medicine published between January 1, 2000, and July 30, 2005, in JAMA, The Lancet, and the New England Journal of Medicine. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The proportion of trials favoring newer treatments over the standard of care was evaluated by funding source. RESULTS: Of the 324 superiority trials, 21 cited no funding source. Of the 104 trials funded solely by not-for-profit organizations, 51 (49%) reported evidence significantly favoring newer treatments over the standard of care, whereas 53 (51%) did not (P = .80). By contrast, 92 (67.2%) of 137 trials funded solely by for-profit organizations favored newer treatments over standard of care (P
MetadataShow full item record
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Incomplete Financial Disclosure for Study of Funding and Outcomes in Major Cardiovascular Trials Ridker, Paul M. (2006-06-21)