Skip to main content
Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine logoLink to Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine
. 1992 Feb;85(2):71–76. doi: 10.1177/014107689208500206

Fate of research studies.

P J Easterbrook 1, D R Matthews 1
PMCID: PMC1294885  PMID: 1538384

Abstract

A retrospective survey was conducted of 720 research protocols, approved by the Central Oxford Research Ethics Committee between 1984 and 1987, to determine the fate of research studies from inception. Forty-five per cent were clinical trials, 23% were observational studies and 32% were laboratory-based experimental studies. Further information was obtained on 487 studies, of which 287 (59%) had been completed, 100 (21%) had never started, 58 (12%) had been abandoned or were in abeyance and 42 (9%) were still ongoing, as of May 1990. Forty-three per cent of the original 487 studies were subsequently published or presented. The most frequent reason for not starting a study was failure to obtain funding (40%). The main reason for abandoning a study was difficulty in recruiting study participants (28%). Departure of one of the investigators from the institution and a variety of logistical problems were also common reasons for either not starting or abandoning a study. A thorough review of the pragmatic as well as the scientific aspects of a planned research project is important to minimize the initiation of studies that are unlikely to succeed.

Full text

PDF
71

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Allen P. A., Waters W. E. Development of an ethical committee and its effect on research design. Lancet. 1982 May 29;1(8283):1233–1236. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(82)92349-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Altman D. G. Statistics and ethics in medical research: III How large a sample? Br Med J. 1980 Nov 15;281(6251):1336–1338. doi: 10.1136/bmj.281.6251.1336. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Anderson J., Evered D. C. Why do research on research? Lancet. 1986 Oct 4;2(8510):799–802. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90312-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Arcand M., Williamson J. An evaluation of home visiting of patients by physicians in geriatric medicine. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1981 Sep 12;283(6293):718–720. doi: 10.1136/bmj.283.6293.718. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Blackwell B., Shepherd M. Early evaluation of psychotropic drugs in man. A trial that failed. Lancet. 1967 Oct 14;2(7520):819–822. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(67)92250-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Cook C. C., Scannell T. D., Lipsedge M. S. Another trial that failed. Lancet. 1988 Mar 5;1(8584):524–525. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(88)91309-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Cooper L. S., Chalmers T. C., McCally M., Berrier J., Sacks H. S. The poor quality of early evaluations of magnetic resonance imaging. JAMA. 1988 Jun 10;259(22):3277–3280. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Denham M. J., Foster A., Tyrrell D. A. Work of a district ethical committee. Br Med J. 1979 Oct 27;2(6197):1042–1045. doi: 10.1136/bmj.2.6197.1042. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Easterbrook P. J., Berlin J. A., Gopalan R., Matthews D. R. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet. 1991 Apr 13;337(8746):867–872. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(91)90201-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Fletcher R. H., Fletcher S. W. Clinical research in general medical journals: a 30-year perspective. N Engl J Med. 1979 Jul 26;301(4):180–183. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197907263010403. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Juhl E., Christensen E., Tygstrup N. The epidemiology of the gastrointestinal randomized clinical trial. N Engl J Med. 1977 Jan 6;296(1):20–22. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197701062960105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Smith R. The funding of medical research: going up or coming down? Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1988 Jan 23;296(6617):267–270. doi: 10.1136/bmj.296.6617.267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine are provided here courtesy of Royal Society of Medicine Press

RESOURCES