The obstetrical research landscape: a cross-sectional analysis of clinical trials from 2007-2020

Abstract

BackgroundObstetrical complications affect more than a third of women globally, but are underrepresented in clinical research. Little is known about the comprehensive obstetrical clinical trial landscape, how it compares with other fields, or factors associated with the successful completion of obstetrical trials.ObjectiveThis study aimed to characterize obstetrical clinical trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov with the primary objective of identifying features associated with early discontinuation and results reporting.Study DesignThis is a cross-sectional study with descriptive, logistic regression and Cox regression analyses of clinical trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. Our primary exposure variables were trial focus (obstetrical or nonobstetrical) and trial funding (industry, United States government, or academic). We conducted additional exploratory analyses of other trial features including design, enrollment, and therapeutic focus. We examined the associations of exposure variables and other trial features with 2 primary outcomes: early discontinuation and results reporting.ResultsWe downloaded data for all studies (N=332,417) registered on ClinicalTrials.gov from October 1, 2007, to March 9, 2020, from the Aggregate Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov database. We excluded studies with a noninterventional design (n=63,697) and those registered before October 1, 2007 (n=45,209). A total of 4276 obstetrical trials (1.9%) (ie, interventional studies) and 219,235 nonobstetric trials (98.1%) were compared. Among all trials, 2.8% of academic-funded trials, 1.9% of United States government–funded trials, and 0.4% of industry-funded trials focused on obstetrics. The quantity of obstetrical trials increased over time (10.8% annual growth rate). Compared with nonobstetrical trials, obstetrical trials had a greater risk of early discontinuation (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.40; 95% confidence interval, 1.21–1.62; P<.0001) and similar odds of results reporting (adjusted odds ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.72–1.10; P=.19). Among obstetrical trials funders after controlling for confounding variables, United States government–funded trials were at the lowest risk of early discontinuation (United States government, adjusted hazard ratio, 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.07–0.69; P=.009; industry reference; academic, adjusted hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.62–1.74; P=.88). Academic-funded trials had the lowest odds of results reporting after controlling for confounding variables (academic institutions, adjusted odds ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.22–0.68; P=.0009; industry reference; United States government, adjusted odds ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.53–2.09; P=.87).ConclusionObstetrical trials represent only 1.9% of all clinical trials in ClinicalTrials.gov and have comparatively poor completion. All stakeholders should commit to increasing the number of obstetrical trials and improving their completion and dissemination to ensure clinical research reflects the obstetrical burden of disease and advances maternal health.