Background If trials of therapeutic interventions are to serve society's interests, they must be of high methodological quality and must satisfy moral commitments to human subjects. The authors set out to develop a clinical-trials compendium in which standards for the ethical treatment of human subjects are integrated with standards for research methods.
Methods The authors rank-ordered the world's nations and chose the 31 with >700 active trials as of 24 July 2008. Governmental and other authoritative entities of the 31 countries were searched, and 1004 English-language documents containing ethical and/or methodological standards for clinical trials were identified. The authors extracted standards from 144 of those: 50 designated as ‘core’, 39 addressing trials of invasive procedures and a 5% sample (N=55) of the remainder. As the integrating framework for the standards we developed a coherent taxonomy encompassing all elements of a trial's stages.
Findings Review of the 144 documents yielded nearly 15 000 discrete standards. After duplicates were removed, 5903 substantive standards remained, distributed in the taxonomy as follows: initiation, 1401 standards, 8 divisions; design, 1869 standards, 16 divisions; conduct, 1473 standards, 8 divisions; analysing and reporting results, 997 standards, four divisions; and post-trial standards, 168 standards, 5 divisions.
Conclusions The overwhelming number of source documents and standards uncovered in this study was not anticipated beforehand and confirms the extraordinary complexity of the clinical trials enterprise. This taxonomy of multinational ethical and methodological standards may help trialists and overseers improve the quality of clinical trials, particularly given the globalisation of clinical research.
- Clinical trials
- research ethics
- research methods
- scientific research
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Cancer Institute or the National Institutes of Health.
Funding This research was supported by Award Number R01CA134995 from the National Cancer Institute of the United States.
Competing interests None declared.
Ethics approval The study was approved by the Institutional Review Boards of The Methodist Hospital Research Institute and Baylor College of Medicine.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Ethics and methods in surgical trials
- Methodological quality and reporting of ethical requirements in phase III cancer trials
- Ethics in systematic reviews
- Methodological quality and reporting of ethical requirements in clinical trials
- Hidden risks associated with clinical trials in developing countries
- Assessing ethics of trials in systematic reviews
- Methodological standards, quality of reporting and regulatory compliance in animal research on amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a systematic review
- Clinical trial design and dissemination: comprehensive analysis of clinicaltrials.gov and PubMed data since 2005
- Developing capacity to protect human research subjects in a post-conflict, resource-constrained setting: procedures and prospects
- Between universalism and relativism: a conceptual exploration of problems in formulating and applying international biomedical ethical guidelines