Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

Benchmarking university medical centres for responsible metrics

Susanne Wieschowski, Nico Riedel, Katharina Wollmann, Hannes Kahrass, Stephanie Müller-Ohlraun, Christopher Schürmann, Sean Kelley, Ute Kszuk, Bob Siegerink, Ulrich Dirnagl, Jörg Meerpohl, View ORCID ProfileDaniel Strech
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/467746
Susanne Wieschowski
1Institute for Ethics, History, and Philosophy of Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nico Riedel
2QUEST Center for Transforming Biomedical Research, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Katharina Wollmann
3Institute for Evidence in Medicine (for Cochrane Germany Foundation), Medical Center – University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Germany
5Cochrane Germany Foundation, Freiburg, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hannes Kahrass
1Institute for Ethics, History, and Philosophy of Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stephanie Müller-Ohlraun
2QUEST Center for Transforming Biomedical Research, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christopher Schürmann
1Institute for Ethics, History, and Philosophy of Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sean Kelley
4Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ute Kszuk
5Cochrane Germany Foundation, Freiburg, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bob Siegerink
6Center for Stroke Research Berlin, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ulrich Dirnagl
2QUEST Center for Transforming Biomedical Research, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
4Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jörg Meerpohl
3Institute for Evidence in Medicine (for Cochrane Germany Foundation), Medical Center – University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniel Strech
1Institute for Ethics, History, and Philosophy of Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
2QUEST Center for Transforming Biomedical Research, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
4Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Daniel Strech
  • For correspondence: daniel.strech@charite.de
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background The results of completed clinical trials build the backbone of evidence-based medicine and inform the design and review of future trials. Many investigations, however, have found that a large proportion of trial results are not disseminated or disseminated with a substantial delay. For most clinical trials, university medical centres (UMCs) take the academic lead. The UMC-specific proportion of timely disseminated trial results thus becomes a “responsible metric” that can inform alternative national and international benchmarking of UMCs.

Methods We sampled and tracked all registered trials for all German UMCs that were officially completed between 2009 and 2013. We present our results in several formats, including percentages, Kaplan-Meier graphs and logistic regression modelling. The results, together with an interactive website, benchmark all German UMCs with regard to their performance in results dissemination.

Results We identified and tracked 2,132 clinical trials. For 1,509 trials, one of the 36 German UMCs took the academic lead. Of these 1,509 “lead trials”, 39% published their results via journal publications or summary results in a timely manner (<24 months after completion date). This publication rate varied from 20% to 64% across all 36 German UMCs. More than six years after study completion, 26% of all eligible lead trials still had not disseminated results, accounting for an average of more than 8,000 trial participants each year that were included in trials without any knowledge gain.

Conclusion Despite substantial attention to the topic in the last decade, there is still a delay or even absence of results dissemination of trials, which is unethical, wastes public resources, and negatively affects decision making in medical research and health care. German UMCs have many unique opportunities to improve this situation. The timely dissemination of trial results should become a principle of “Good Scientific Practice” guidelines and play a role in institutional reward and incentive schemes. Funders may consider dissemination practices when reviewing applications for clinical studies. Further research should evaluate whether and how a transparent benchmarking of UMC performance in trial results dissemination and other “responsible metrics” helps to increase value and reduce waste in medical research.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted November 18, 2018.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Benchmarking university medical centres for responsible metrics
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Benchmarking university medical centres for responsible metrics
Susanne Wieschowski, Nico Riedel, Katharina Wollmann, Hannes Kahrass, Stephanie Müller-Ohlraun, Christopher Schürmann, Sean Kelley, Ute Kszuk, Bob Siegerink, Ulrich Dirnagl, Jörg Meerpohl, Daniel Strech
bioRxiv 467746; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/467746
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Benchmarking university medical centres for responsible metrics
Susanne Wieschowski, Nico Riedel, Katharina Wollmann, Hannes Kahrass, Stephanie Müller-Ohlraun, Christopher Schürmann, Sean Kelley, Ute Kszuk, Bob Siegerink, Ulrich Dirnagl, Jörg Meerpohl, Daniel Strech
bioRxiv 467746; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/467746

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Scientific Communication and Education
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (4087)
  • Biochemistry (8762)
  • Bioengineering (6479)
  • Bioinformatics (23341)
  • Biophysics (11750)
  • Cancer Biology (9149)
  • Cell Biology (13248)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (7417)
  • Ecology (11369)
  • Epidemiology (2066)
  • Evolutionary Biology (15087)
  • Genetics (10399)
  • Genomics (14009)
  • Immunology (9121)
  • Microbiology (22040)
  • Molecular Biology (8779)
  • Neuroscience (47368)
  • Paleontology (350)
  • Pathology (1420)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2482)
  • Physiology (3704)
  • Plant Biology (8050)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1431)
  • Synthetic Biology (2208)
  • Systems Biology (6016)
  • Zoology (1249)