An analysis of the effect of funding source in randomized clinical trials of second generation antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia - PubMed (original) (raw)

Review

An analysis of the effect of funding source in randomized clinical trials of second generation antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia

John H Montgomery et al. Control Clin Trials. 2004 Dec.

Abstract

Objective: The effect of funding source on the outcome of randomized controlled trials has been investigated in several medical disciplines; however, psychiatry has been largely excluded from such analyses. In this article, randomized controlled trials of second generation antipsychotics in schizophrenia are reviewed and analyzed with respect to funding source (industry vs. non-industry funding).

Method: A literature search was conducted for randomized, double-blind trials in which at least one of the tested treatments was a second generation antipsychotic. In each study, design quality and study outcome were assessed quantitatively according to rating scales. Mean quality and outcome scores were compared in the industry-funded studies and non-industry-funded studies. An analysis of the primary author's affiliation with industry was similarly performed.

Results: Results of industry-funded studies significantly favored second generation over first generation antipsychotics when compared to non-industry-funded studies. Non-industry-funded studies showed a trend toward higher quality than industry-funded studies; however, the difference between the two was not significant. Also, within the industry-funded studies, outcomes of trials involving first authors employed by industry sponsors demonstrated a trend toward second generation over first generation antipsychotics to a greater degree than did trials involving first authors employed outside the industry (p=0.05).

Conclusions: While the retrospective design of the study limits the strength of the findings, the data suggest that industry bias may occur in randomized controlled trials in schizophrenia. There appears to be several sources by which bias may enter clinical research, including trial design, control of data analysis and multiplicity/redundancy of trials.

PubMed Disclaimer

Cited by

Where Does Evidence from New Trials for Schizophrenia Fit with the Existing Evidence: A Case of the Emperor's New Clothes?
Jayaram M, Rattehalli RD, Adams CE. Jayaram M, et al. Schizophr Res Treatment. 2012;2012:625738. doi: 10.1155/2012/625738. Epub 2012 Apr 8. Schizophr Res Treatment. 2012. PMID: 22966441 Free PMC article.
Paroxetine versus other anti-depressive agents for depression.
Cipriani A, Furukawa TA, Veronese A, Watanabe N, Churchill R, McGuire H, Barbui C. Cipriani A, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(2):CD006531. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006531. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007. PMID: 25267892 Free PMC article.
Medical reversal: why we must raise the bar before adopting new technologies.
Prasad V, Cifu A. Prasad V, et al. Yale J Biol Med. 2011 Dec;84(4):471-8. Yale J Biol Med. 2011. PMID: 22180684 Free PMC article.
Fluvoxamine versus other anti-depressive agents for depression.
Omori IM, Watanabe N, Nakagawa A, Cipriani A, Barbui C, McGuire H, Churchill R, Furukawa TA. Omori IM, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Mar 17;2010(3):CD006114. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006114.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010. PMID: 20238342 Free PMC article. Review.
Haloperidol (oral) versus olanzapine (oral) for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders.
Ibragimov K, Keane GP, Carreño Glaría C, Cheng J, Llosa AE. Ibragimov K, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Jul 3;7(7):CD013425. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013425.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024. PMID: 38958149 Review.

An analysis of the effect of funding source in randomized clinical trials of second generation antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia - PubMed (original) (raw)