Cited by 49Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsPharmaceutical industry and healthcare

Reported use of data monitoring committees in the main published reports of randomized controlled trials: a cross-sectional study

Sydes, Matthew R, Altman, Douglas G, Babikera, Abdel B, Parmar, Mahesh KB, Spiegelhalter, David J, DAMOCLES group·2004·Clinical Trials

Abstract

Background We describe a review of published main reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), in order to measure the frequency of reported use of data monitoring committees (DMCs) and factors associated with reported DMC use. Methods Twenty-four higher impact general and specialist medical journals were handsearched for main reports of RCTs in order to provide a cross-sectional sample of trials published in the year 2000. Additionally, the same general medical journals were handsearched for 1990 to allow a comparison across time. Results Of 662 RCTs published in 2000, 120 (18%) explicitly reported using a DMC, while 107 (16%) reported planned interim analyses. Overall, about a quarter (24%) reported at least one of these. A higher proportion of trials reported using a DMC in 2000 than 1990 (70/282, 25% versus 21/204, 10%) in the general medical journals. Logistic regression models suggested the more important variables associated with increased reported DMC use were: later year of publication, publication in general medical journal, survival-based endpoint, multicentre trial, increasing number of patients recruited, at least one arm involving a placebo, at least one arm involving a drug, factorial design and USA involvement in the trial. Conclusions In 2000, about a quarter of main RCT reports mention use of a DMC. Actual use of DMCs is likely to be somewhat greater. Reporting use of a DMC was more likely for larger and longer trials among other factors. We believe the factors affecting reported use affect actual use. It is recommended that when a DMC oversees a trial, brief details should be explicitly included in the main trial paper. Standard nomenclature for DMCs is recommended.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1191/1740774504cn003oa

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 14 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sydes, M. R., Altman, D. G., Babikera, A. B., Parmar, M. K., Spiegelhalter, D. J., & DAMOCLES group
Affiliations
  • MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL (GB)
  • Cancer Research UK (GB)
  • MRC Biostatistics Unit (GB)
Venue
Clinical Trials
Published
2004-02
Volume
1
Issue
1
Pages
48-59
ISSN
  • 1740-7745 (ISSN-L)
  • 1740-7753
OpenAlex
W2075689530
Cited by
49
References
14
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
3.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Trials (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
Keywords
data monitoring committees, randomized controlled trials, interim analysis, publication trends, trial size, clinical trial endpoints
MeSH terms
Cross-Sectional Studies, Humans, Terminology as Topic, Periodicals as Topic, Research Design, Logistic Models, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Clinical Trials Data Monitoring Committees

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review