This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (21)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Veronica Yank, BS; Drummond Rennie, MD

JAMA. 2002;287:2835-2838.

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<.001). Neither protection was described in 48 articles (16%) published before 1997 vs 28 (9%) after 1997 (P = .01). In subgroup analyses, those journals with the worst initial rates generally improved the most. BMJ did not describe informed consent in 25 articles (42%) before 1997 vs 15 (25%) after 1997 (P = .05), and JAMA did not describe ethics committee approval in 25 (42%) before 1997 vs 13 (22%) after 1997 (P = .02). BMJ, JAMA, and Annals had the lowest initial rates of reporting on both protections in the same article, with 25 (42%), 32 (53%), and 34 (57%), respectively, but improved markedly to 38 (63%), 43 (72%), and 45 (75%) (P = .02, .04, and .03, respectively).

Conclusions  Major medical journals have improved their reporting on informed consent and ethics committee approval; however, 9% of studies still report neither.

Author Affiliations: Institute for Health Policy Studies and Medical School, University of California, San Francisco (Ms Yank and Dr Rennie); and JAMA, Chicago, Ill (Dr Rennie).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Reporting of ethics-related methods in epidemiological research
Jacobsen
J. Med. Ethics 2009;35:262-267.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A comparison of journal instructions regarding institutional review board approval and conflict-of-interest disclosure between 1995 and 2005
Rowan-Legg et al.
J. Med. Ethics 2009;35:74-78.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Failure to report and provide commentary on research ethics board approval and informed consent in medical journals
Finlay and Fernandez
J. Med. Ethics 2008;34:761-764.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Reporting ethics committee approval and patient consent by study design in five general medical journals
Schroter et al.
J. Med. Ethics 2006;32:718-723.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Reporting Ethical Protections in Physical Therapy Research
Henley and Frank
ptjournal 2006;86:499-509.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Publication of ethically suspect research: should it occur?
Fernandez
Int J Qual Health Care 2005;17:377-378.
FULL TEXT  

Institutional review board approval of projects presented as posters at an ASHP Midyear Clinical Meeting
Gonzalez et al.
Am J Health Syst Pharm 2005;62:1890-1893.
FULL TEXT  

Orthodontic Clinical Trials III: Reporting of ethical issues associated with clinical trials published in three orthodontic journals between 1989 and 1998
Harrison
J. Orthod. 2005;32:115-121.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Reporting of informed consent and ethics committee approval in genetics studies of stroke
Meschia and Merino
J. Med. Ethics 2003;29:371-372.
FULL TEXT