Table 1 Discrepancies of registered and reported (published) outcomes
Major outcome discrepancies between registry and publication | Number (%) |
|---|---|
RCTs with major discrepancies | |
all prospectively registered RCTs | 27 (100%) |
RCTs with major discrepancies between protocol and publication | 10 (37.0%) |
Type of major discrepancies between registry and publication | |
all major discrepancies | 19 (100%) |
registered primary outcome was reported as a secondary outcome in the published article | 6 (31.6%) |
new primary outcome was introduced in the published article | 5 (26.3%) |
timing of assessment of the registered and published primary outcomes differs | 5 (26.3%) |
registered primary outcome was omitted in the published article | 2 (10.5%) |
published primary outcome was registered as secondary outcome | 1 (5.3%) |
Relation of primary outcome discrepancy on statistically significant results in RCTs | |
all major discrepancies | 19 (100%) |
unable to evaluate | 4 (21.1%) |
evaluable | 15 (78.9%) |
discrepancy favours statistical significance | 12 |
discrepancy does not favour statistical significance | 2 |
unclear | 1 |
All evaluable published RCTs with discrepancies favouring statistical significance | 8 (80%) |