Premium
The Role and Impact of Research Agendas on the Comparative‐Effectiveness Research Among Antihyperlipidemics
Author(s) -
Dunn A G,
Bourgeois F T,
Murthy S,
Mandl K D,
Day R O,
Coiera E
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
clinical pharmacology and therapeutics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.941
H-Index - 188
eISSN - 1532-6535
pISSN - 0009-9236
DOI - 10.1038/clpt.2011.279
Subject(s) - clinical trial , clinical study design , clinical research , research design , medicine , alternative medicine , set (abstract data type) , pharmaceutical industry , clinical pharmacology , medical education , family medicine , pharmacology , computer science , sociology , social science , pathology , programming language
Although it is well established that funding source influences the publication of clinical trials, relatively little is known about how funding influences trial design. We examined a public trial registry to determine how funding source shapes trial design among trials involving antihyperlipidemics. We used an automated process to identify and analyze 809 trials from a set of 72,564. Three networks representing industry‐, collaboratively, and non‐industry‐funded trials were constructed. Each network comprised 18 drugs as nodes connected according to the number of comparisons made between them. The results indicated that industry‐funded trials were more likely to compare across drugs and examine dyslipidemia as a condition, and less likely to register safety outcomes. The source of funding for clinical trials had a measurable effect on trial design, which helps quantify differences in research agendas. Improved monitoring of current clinical trials may be used to more closely align research agendas to clinical needs. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (2012); 91 4, 685–691. doi: 10.1038/clpt.2011.279