Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer


Vol. 17 No. 1 (2019)

Clinical trial transparency at McGill University

June 25, 2019


Transparency in clinical trials is an issue under considerable scrutiny at present, and rightfully so, given that people's lives are both used as a resource in such research and affected by its results. Hence, the results of clinical trials conducted should be made available in both journal articles and in open access trial registries (like The latter not only make research results more accessible to the general public but are also considered essential resources in systematic reviews to avoid publication bias. Yet, up to 89% of clinical trials conducted at McGill University are not reported in clinical trial registries, and up to 37% of the trials are not published. However, since most McGill University researchers use public funding to conduct trials on human subjects, they have an obligation to make their research freely accessible. Spreading awareness regarding this issue among key stakeholders is a possible way to reduce this problem and increase the transparency of clinical research at McGill University.



  1. F. Song, S. Parekh, L. Hooper, Y.K. Loke, J. Ryder, A.J. Sutton, C. Hing, C.S. Kwok, C. Pang, I. Harvey, Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases, Health Technol. Assess. Winch. Engl. 14 (2010) iii, ix–xi, 1–193. doi:10.3310/hta14080.
  2. WHO | Joint statement on public disclosure of results from clinical trials, WHO. (n.d.). (accessed June 20, 2019).
  3. Why Should I Register and Submit Results? -, (n.d.). (accessed June 20, 2019).
  4. T. Tse, R.J. Williams, D.A. Zarin, Reporting “basic results” in, Chest. 136 (2009) 295–303. doi:10.1378/chest.08-3022.
  5. Trial registries and publication bias, Cochrane Handb. (n.d.).
  6. R. Pradhan, K. Garnick, B. Barkondaj, H.S. Jordan, A. Ash, H. Yu, Inadequate diversity of information resources searched in USA-affiliated systematic reviews and meta-analyses: 2005-2016, J. Clin. Epidemiol. (2018). doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.05.024.
  7. H. Canada, Health Canada’s Clinical Trials Database, Aem. (2013). (accessed June 25, 2019).
  8. T. Lemmens, C.H. Vacaflor, Clinical trial transparency in the Americas: the need to coordinate regulatory spheres, BMJ. 362 (2018) k2493. doi:10.1136/bmj.k2493.
  9. I.A.P. on R.E. Government of Canada, Interagency Advisory Panel on Research Ethics, (2016). (accessed June 25, 2019).
  10. A. Powell-Smith, B. Goldacre, The TrialsTracker: Automated ongoing monitoring of failure to share clinical trial results by all major companies and research institutions, F1000Research. 5 (2016) 2629. doi:10.12688/f1000research.10010.1.
  11. Who’s not sharing their trial results?, TrialsTracker. (n.d.).
  12. R. Pradhan.Tracking-clinical-trial-reporting-by-Canadian-universities development by creating an account on GitHub, 2019. (accessed June 25, 2019).
  13. T. Bruckner, Why British universities are now racing to post their clinical trial results, TranspariMed. (n.d.).
  14. A.P. Prayle, M.N. Hurley, A.R. Smyth, Compliance with mandatory reporting of clinical trial results on cross sectional study, BMJ. 344 (2012) d7373. doi:10.1136/bmj.d7373.
  15. J. Lexchin, M. Herder, P. Doshi, Canada finally opens up data on new drugs and devices, BMJ. 365 (2019) l1825. doi:10.1136/bmj.l1825.


Download data is not yet available.