
European universities dismal at reporting results of clinical trials - lainon
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01389-y
======
jcranmer
US universities are also pretty bad:
[https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2018/09/20/re...](https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2018/09/20/reporting-
clinical-trials), although Europe seems to be doing a worse job at complying
with mandatory reporting in general.

Funnily enough, everyone with 100% compliance is a Big Pharma company, while
everyone with 0% compliance is an academic university.

~~~
throwayEngineer
Academia is about ego, not being correct.

If you are getting a PhD, you prove what your professor tells you.

It seems every time I read a published study, the data is unusable, but they
claim an extremely specific outcome.

My curiosity, why does the peer review process let this go?

~~~
losteric
If you are getting a PhD, chances are you or your professor applied for and
received funding for a specific research project - and that's what you
research. Obviously an advisor will guide you towards doing work they can
advise on, as is their role...

At the end of the project, results are expected and reported. Broad
significant outcomes are unlikely without lots of clean data, so the trend is
towards narrow-but-significant outcomes.

Reporting is biased against publishing insignificant outcomes... that's a
valid criticism. Peer-reviewed publication is a lot of work to announce "we
found nothing". However, that is not a valid critique of peer review - even
null results are thoroughly vetted.

Despite flaws, peer reviewed science is still clearly superior to commercial
research - which suppressed climate change, smoking cancer, and the effects of
lead air pollution for decades.

------
yostrovs
It's starting to seem like we agressively discuss a lot of proposed European
rules here on HN. But, when they come into effect they're immediately ignored
by the people who should be complying and the people who should be enforcing.

~~~
vesinisa
In this instance it might be because there are is no penalty for running afoul
of the obligations:

> Updated laws on clinical trials that are not expected to become legally
> binding until 2020 specify that there should be penalties for institutions
> that don’t comply with the rules.

If following the rules was a mandatory requirement for further funding for the
same institution, I am sure they would update their internal policies in an
eyeblink.

~~~
SCHiM
Same with gdpr, it was on the rolls since 2016(?)

~~~
mercer
I've been (naively?) surprised at how many websites clearly break the GDPR
rules we've been wringing our hand over on HN for the past months.

~~~
l4u532
GDPR is imposed regularly, see [1] for an early account. Or do you mean
something else?

[1] [https://www.gdprtoday.org/gdpr-in-
numbers/](https://www.gdprtoday.org/gdpr-in-numbers/)

------
ylem
An interesting read on the effects of FDA trial registration requirements and
publication bias:
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6199729/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6199729/)

------
Creationer
How many of these studies are conducted in English vs. the legacy local
language?

~~~
ginko
Languages other than English are considered legacy now?

~~~
Creationer
For Academia, yes. All of the scientific articles are written in that
language.

The youngest generations are hugely influenced by Youtube and the internet,
and many speak English more fluently than their own legacy local language.

This is a great thing for humanity. A common language will ease the flow of
ideas and simplify commerce.

~~~
mefsb
And destroy a great deal of culture. No thanks.

~~~
Creationer
Culture is not language, it is the people. Why do people defend language,
which can be recorded, yet are silent on the significantly below-replacement
fertility rates of some European populations, and the high levels of
immigration that will eventually replace the native 'cultures'?

~~~
dragonwriter
> Culture is not language, it is the people.

No, culture is not people, it is the shared behaviors and values of the
people; use of a particular language is part of that. Immigration may threaten
that (since the immigrants do bring their own culture), but immigrants often
assimilate into the host culture, or at least adopt large portions of it.

Culture is _not_ genetic heritage.

