Transparency Monitoring

Cross-source consensus on Transparency Monitoring from 1 sources and 5 claims.

1 sources · 5 claims

Benefits

Cross-registration can cause double-counting because registry entries can exceed the number of unique trials. — Accounting for cross-registration in monitoring transparency in clinical trials: a cross-sectional study of trials at German university medical centres
Poorly linked or inconsistent cross-registrations can mislead assessments of registration and results reporting. — Accounting for cross-registration in monitoring transparency in clinical trials: a cross-sectional study of trials at German university medical centres
Registry-based transparency assessments in Germany can be materially wrong if cross-registrations are not identified and reconciled. — Accounting for cross-registration in monitoring transparency in clinical trials: a cross-sectional study of trials at German university medical centres
Programmatic access to aggregated registry data supports automated and regularly updated monitoring workflows. — Accounting for cross-registration in monitoring transparency in clinical trials: a cross-sectional study of trials at German university medical centres
WHO guidance on minimum results elements and harmonised reporting standards aims to address heterogeneous results formats. — Accounting for cross-registration in monitoring transparency in clinical trials: a cross-sectional study of trials at German university medical centres