ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Timely publication of clinical trials is critical to ensure the dissemination and implementation of high-quality healthcare evidence. This study investigates the publication rate and time to publication of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) registered in the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of RCTs registered with the ANZCTR in 2007, 2009, and 2011. Multiple bibliographic databases were searched until October 2021 to identify trial publications. We then calculated publication rates, proportions, and the time to publish calculated from the date of first participation enrolment to publication date. RESULTS: Of 1,970 trial registrations, 541 (27%) remained unpublished 10 to 14 years later, and the proportion of trials published decreased by 7% from 2007 to 2011. The average time to publish was 4.63 years. The prospective trial registration rate for 2007, 2009 and 2011 was 48% (952 trials) and over this time there was an increase of 19% (280 prospective trials). Trials funded by non-Industry organizations were more likely to be published (74%, 1204/1625 trials) than the industry-funded trials (61%, 224/345 trials). Larger trials with at least 1000 participants were published at a rate of 88% (85/97 trials) and on average took 5.4 years to be published. Smaller trials with less than 100 participants were published at a lower rate with 67% (687/1024 trials) published and these trials took 4.31 years on average to publish. CONCLUSIONS: Just over a quarter of all trials on the ANZCTR for 2007, 2009, and 2011 remain unpublished over a decade later. The average time to publication of nearly five years may reflect the larger trials which will have taken longer to recruit participants. Over half of study sample trials were retrospectively registered, but prospective registration improved over time, highlighting the role of mandating trial registration.
Subject(s)
Research Design , Humans , Publication Bias , Cross-Sectional Studies , New Zealand , Australia , Registries , Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE: Bilateral ectopic pregnancy is one of the rarest forms of ectopic pregnancy due to the difficulty of diagnosis and interference before surgery, where ectopic pregnancy cases are clinically indistinguishable from unilateral ectopic pregnancy, and many cases are discovered by chance during surgery.The Importance of this report comes from the history of a patient with four cesarean sections, who developed two-tailed tubal ectopic pregnancy without ovulation induction or any contraception methods. CASE PRESENTATION: Our patient after admission to the emergency department was diagnosed with a unilateral GS = 9W ectopic pregnancy in the right fallopian tube based on Doppler echography. However, during the surgery, the surgeon discovered a rupture in the left tube, which was discovered to be another left fallopian ectopic pregnancy confirmed by pathology. CLINICAL DISCUSSION: Our patient presented with typical symptoms of ectopic pregnancy confirmed by BHCG blood test and Doppler ultra sound but the untypical finding of bilateral ectopic pregnancy without suggestive history couldn't be discovered until laparatomy. CONCLUSION: This case reminds us to always check both adnexa before making any decisions and because of the poor presurgical diagnosis of EP, it highlights the importance of human resources and equipment which could save our patients fertility. CONCLUSION: To preserve the integrity of the organs and the patient's future fertility the doctor who diagnoses a tubal ectopic pregnancy should always check the other tube before taking action even if the suspicion is not due to the induction of ovulation, and never fully trust imaging study only as an aiding tool to make a diagnosis; nevertheless, the patient could have been better managed and her fertility saved if better capabilities were available.
