Résumé :
|
[BDSP. Notice produite par INIST-CNRS Qa2jVR0x. Diffusion soumise à autorisation]. Context To determine whether journals have improved their disclosure of ethical protections in clinical trials. Methods Comparison of clinical trials published before and after 1997 (July 1995 to December 1996 and January 1998 to June 1999) in Annals of Internal Medicine, BMJ, JAMA, The Lancet, and The New England Journal of Medicine. Sixty articles per journal per period were randomly selected and assessed for rate of reporting on informed consent and on ethics committee approval. Results Informed consent was not described in 79 articles (26%) published before 1997 vs 53 (18%) published after 1997 (P=01), and ethics committee approval was not mentioned in 93 (31%) before 1997 vs 54 (18%) after 1997 (P<. neither protection was described in articles published before vs after subgroup analyses those journals with the worst initial rates genii erally improved most. bmj did not describe informed consent and jama ethics committee approval annals had lowest of reporting on both protections same h article respectively but markedly to and. conclusions major medical have their however studies still report neither.>
|