Clinical trial registration: transparency is the watchword

All parties associated in clinical trials—patients, doctors, scientists, industry—share a common desire for a vigorous clinical research enterprise that brings innovations to patients as quickly as possible. However, recent scandals in the UK 1 Pearson H Tragic drug trial spotlights potent molecule. Nature. 2006; published online March 17. DOI: 10.1038/news060313–17 Crossref Google Scholar and elsewhere 2 Curfman GD Morrissey S Drazen JM Expression of concern: Bombardier et al. “Comparison of upper gastrointestinal toxicity of rofecoxib and naproxen in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.” N Engl J Med 2000; 243: 1520–28. N Engl J Med. 2005; 353: 2813-2814 Crossref PubMed Scopus (116) Google Scholar , 3 Stephens J Pfizer faulted over drug trials in Nigeria. Washington Post. May 7, 2006; : A01 PubMed Google Scholar have diminished public trust in the clinical research industry. This distrust is worrisome because industry funds an increasing proportion of clinical trials, 4 Patsopoulos NA Ioannidis JP Analatos AA Origin and funding of the most frequently cited papers in medicine: database analysis. BMJ. 2006; 332: 1061-1064 Crossref PubMed Scopus (121) Google Scholar and distrust might result in lower enrolment in trials and slower innovation. Trial registers: protecting patients, advancing trustMay 19 was International Clinical Trials Day. The goal was to generate awareness among the public about the value of clinical research, and clinical trials in particular. The Lancet supports this endeavour unreservedly. Full-Text PDF