 |
|
Clinical Trial Registries
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
To the Editor: Dr Zarin and colleagues1 discussed the problems and challenges faced by trial registries associated with variations across trials in naming of the same molecule or intervention. A complementary issue they did not address is the duplicate naming of randomized clinical trials themselves. The recent proliferation of randomized controlled trials has made acronym overlap all too common. There have been at least 16 HEART trials, 16 IMPACT trials, and 13 SMART Trials.2-8 When naming trials, investigators naturally are drawn to pleasant and meaningful acronyms.9 However, duplicate trial names, especially among trials in related fields, have the potential to promote confusion among researchers, practitioners, and the public.
Calls for addressing this issue have perhaps not been specific enough.2, 10 What is needed is not simply registration of names but also restriction of names so that each name is used only once (or once per field or once per decade). The . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Jeffrey L. Saver, MD
jsaver@ucla.edu
Department of Neurology
University of California, Los Angeles
RELATED LETTERS
Clinical Trial Registries
Jais Oliver Berg
JAMA. 2007;298(13):1514.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Clinical Trial Registries—Reply
Deborah A. Zarin, Nicholas C. Ide, Tony Tse, William R. Harlan, and Donald A. B. Lindberg
JAMA. 2007;298(13):1515.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
RELATED ARTICLE
Issues in the Registration of Clinical Trials
Deborah A. Zarin, Nicholas C. Ide, Tony Tse, William R. Harlan, Joyce C. West, and Donald A. B. Lindberg
JAMA. 2007;297(19):2112-2120.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
