Research waste among randomized clinical trials in endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal lesions: a cross-sectional study of ClinicalTrials.gov

To determine the association between the characteristics of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on endoscopic resection and research waste, and to explore potential targets for improvement. ClinicalTrials.gov was searched for phase 3 or 4 RCTs registered between January 01,2000 and December 31, 2021 using the keyword endoscopic resection along with synonyms. The publication status was determined by conducting systematic searches in the PubMed and Google Scholar databases. The adequacy of reporting was assessed using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Reporting Guideline Checklist. Design limitations were evaluated based on risk of bias and whether the manuscript cited a relevant systematic review. The primary outcome was research waste, defined as unpublished data, inadequate reporting, or avoidable design limitations. A total of 86 trials were included. Only 47 (54.7%) RCTs were published after peer review. These trials were more likely than unpublished RCTs to focus on colorectal disease (68.1% vs. 35.9%, P = 0.003) and to have a multicenter design (44.7% vs. 25.6%, P = 0.067). Among the RCTs that were published, 24 (51.1%) of them were deemed to have sufficient reporting and were free from any design limitations. Overall, 70 of the 86 RCTs (81.4%) exhibited research waste. Multivariate analysis revealed that a blinded (P = 0.021) and multicenter (P = 0.017) RCT design independently reduced the risk of research waste. Most RCTs on endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal lesions could be burdened by research waste. Efforts should focus on improving unblinded, single-center RCTs to reduce unnecessary research waste.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Gastroenterology
Published
2025-12-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-025-04459-w
Primary Topic
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Research waste among randomized clinical trials in endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal lesions: a cross-sectional study of ClinicalTrials.gov

Hai‐Xing Wang, Xueting Li, Yun Dai, Jinhai Chen et al.
BMC Gastroenterology
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
article

Research waste among randomized clinical trials in endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal lesions: a cross-sectional study of ClinicalTrials.gov

Hai‐Xing Wang, Xueting Li, Yun Dai, Jinhai Chen, Guoxing Xu, Yadong Zheng
article en

Abstract

To determine the association between the characteristics of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on endoscopic resection and research waste, and to explore potential targets for improvement. ClinicalTrials.gov was searched for phase 3 or 4 RCTs registered between January 01,2000 and December 31, 2021 using the keyword endoscopic resection along with synonyms. The publication status was determined by conducting systematic searches in the PubMed and Google Scholar databases. The adequacy of reporting was assessed using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Reporting Guideline Checklist. Design limitations were evaluated based on risk of bias and whether the manuscript cited a relevant systematic review. The primary outcome was research waste, defined as unpublished data, inadequate reporting, or avoidable design limitations. A total of 86 trials were included. Only 47 (54.7%) RCTs were published after peer review. These trials were more likely than unpublished RCTs to focus on colorectal disease (68.1% vs. 35.9%, P = 0.003) and to have a multicenter design (44.7% vs. 25.6%, P = 0.067). Among the RCTs that were published, 24 (51.1%) of them were deemed to have sufficient reporting and were free from any design limitations. Overall, 70 of the 86 RCTs (81.4%) exhibited research waste. Multivariate analysis revealed that a blinded (P = 0.021) and multicenter (P = 0.017) RCT design independently reduced the risk of research waste. Most RCTs on endoscopic resection of gastrointestinal lesions could be burdened by research waste. Efforts should focus on improving unblinded, single-center RCTs to reduce unnecessary research waste.

BMC GastroenterologyVol. 25(1)
First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University (CN), Children’s Hospital of Fudan University Xiamen Branch (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.