Missing Evidence: Exploring Unpublished Trials in Victoria, Australia

Background: Clinical trial registries were established to improve the transparency and completeness of clinical trial reporting and a number of policies have been introduced to encourage or mandate their use. While prospective trial registration has been endorsed in Australia, there is currently no legal requirement for researchers to register or communicate findings from clinical trials. There has also been, to the best of our knowledge, no analysis previously undertaken on publication rates for clinical trials performed in Australia. Aim: We aimed to determine the proportion of clinical trials that remain 'unpublished' in Victoria, Australia´s second most populous state, between 2009 and 2013. Methods: We used data reported to Cancer Council Victoria's Cancer Trials Management Scheme (CTMS) between 2009 and 2013, to identify trials that had recruited a new patient or recorded any follow-up patient activity in the specified time period. Using this data, we conducted a systematic search of ClinicalTrials.gov , the Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), PubMed and Google for records of the trial. Trial registration numbers, acronyms and scientific titles were used as primary search terms. Results were characterized by type of publication (i.e., whether it was an accredited scientific paper or other) and source location. Results: Of the trials reported to the CTMS between 2009 and 2013, 777 trials were included in this investigation; the majority (58.8%) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Compared with previously published findings, communication of trial results in this study was high; 70% of trials published results in an accredited scientific journal and a further 10% in alternate form, such as a conference abstract or media release. Publication rates were higher for trials with a commercial sponsor (85%) compared with trials sponsored by a cooperative group (77%). Nearly 8% of trials in this study had not been registered on an international clinical trials register. Only 39% of unregistered trials had published results. Of the registered trials, those registered on ClinicalTrials.gov were more likely to be published (86%) compared with trials listed on ANZCTR (68%). Between 2009 and 2013 , 8% of trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov , in our data set, were terminated; 70% of these trials published results. Conclusion: Although the rate at which clinical trial findings were published in Victoria was higher in this investigation compared with equivalent overseas data, trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov were more likely to publish results than unregistered trials or trials registered on ANZCTR. This suggests a potential need for trial registration and publication guidelines in Australia, similar to that of the United States where the requirements and procedures for submitting registration and summary result information for clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov have been compulsory for the last decade.

Exploring the provision of alcohol advice by clinicians to breast cancer patients

Interactions between clinicians and patients along the cancer trajectory provide an opportunity to deliver key messages regarding drinking behaviours and long-term health. This study aimed to explore the extent and nature of clinician-patient discussions regarding alcohol intake and cancer outcomes in the clinical breast cancer setting, using a qualitative research design involving semi-structured interviews. Purposive sampling was used to recruit 27 breast cancer clinicians (eight dietitians, nine breast care nurses, 10 oncologists) across Victoria, Australia. Interview data were analysed using descriptive statistics and a content analysis approach. Clinicians' knowledge of national alcohol recommendations was found to be inconsistent. Clinicians reported a lack of patient awareness of the link between alcohol and breast cancer. Current frameworks for assessing and advising on patient alcohol intake were felt to be impractical. The extent and nature of advice provided about alcohol was influenced by several patient and clinician factors. The provision of alcohol advice in the clinical breast cancer setting is not practiced systematically by any professional group. New approaches are needed to support patient education about alcohol intake and survivorship in the clinical oncology setting.

A review of health impact assessment frameworks

BACKGROUND

Consideration of health impacts of non-health sector policies has been encouraged in many countries, with health impact assessment (HIA) increasingly used worldwide for this purpose. HIA aims to assess the potential impacts of a proposal and make recommendations to improve the potential health outcomes and minimize inequalities. Although many of the same techniques can be used, such as community consultation, engagement or profiling, HIA differs from other community health approaches in its starting point, purpose and relationship to interventions. Many frameworks have been produced to aid practitioners in conducting HIA.

OBJECTIVE

To review the many HIA frameworks in a systematic and comparative way.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHOD

The literature was searched to identify published frameworks giving sufficient guidance for those with the necessary skills to be able to undertake an HIA.

RESULTS

Approaches to HIA reflect their origins, particularly those derived from Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Early HIA resources tended to use a biomedical model of health and examine projects. Later developments were designed for use with policy proposals, and tended to use a socio-economic or environmental model of health. There are more similarities than differences in approaches to HIA, with convergence over time, such as the distinction between 'narrow' and 'broad' focus HIA disappearing. Consideration of health disparities is integral to most HIA frameworks but not universal. A few resources focus solely on inequalities. The extent of community participation advocated varies considerably.

CONCLUSION

It is important to select an HIA framework designed for a comparable context, level of proposal and available resources.