IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1004588.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving transparency in clinical trial reporting

Author

Listed:
  • Alison Farrell
  • On Behalf of the PLOS Medicine Editors

Abstract

The power to interpret the results of randomised clinical trial results relies on transparent reporting of the study design, protocol, methods and analyses. Without such clarity, the benefits of the findings, to both healthcare, policy and research, cannot be realized in full. The publication of the updated CONSORT 2025 and SPIRIT 2025 statements for reporting of randomised clinical trials and protocols, respectively, offers the opportunity to reflect on the power that transparent reporting of clinical trial design and data offers to improve the quality of trials and outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Alison Farrell & On Behalf of the PLOS Medicine Editors, 2025. "Improving transparency in clinical trial reporting," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 22(4), pages 1-3, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1004588
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004588
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1004588
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1004588&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004588?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. An-Wen Chan & Isabelle Boutron & Sally Hopewell & David Moher & Kenneth F Schulz & Gary S Collins & Ruth Tunn & Rakesh Aggarwal & Michael Berkwits & Jesse A Berlin & Nita Bhandari & Nancy J Butcher & , 2025. "SPIRIT 2025 statement: Updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 22(4), pages 1-15, April.
    2. Sally Hopewell & An-Wen Chan & Gary S Collins & Asbjørn Hróbjartsson & David Moher & Kenneth F Schulz & Ruth Tunn & Rakesh Aggarwal & Michael Berkwits & Jesse A Berlin & Nita Bhandari & Nancy J Butche, 2025. "CONSORT 2025 statement: Updated guideline for reporting randomised trials," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 22(4), pages 1-15, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1004588. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.