7 research outputs found

    Optimizing the Data Available Via Health Canada\u27s Clinical Information Portal

    Get PDF
    Through its Public Release of Clinical Information initiative, Health Canada has provided public access to a vast repository of data that have been submitted to support market authorization of drugs and medical devices. Health Canada has released data from more than 160 submissions for drugs, biologics, vaccines and medical devices. The regulator is currently in its third year of a 4-year phase-in schedule to release clinical data proactively from submissions for all new active substances, new clinical indications, generic drugs and higher-risk devices that are approved, withdrawn or rejected. Substantial clinical data submitted by the industry sponsor of the application, including summary-level data and metadata are made publicly available by Health Canada as a matter of policy

    Transparency of Regulatory Data across the European Medicines Agency, Health Canada, and US Food and Drug Administration

    Get PDF
    Based on an analysis of relevant laws and policies, regulator data portals, and information requests, we find that clinical data, including clinical study reports, submitted to the European Medicines Agency and Health Canada to support approval of medicines are routinely made publicly available

    Biomedical journal speed and efficiency: a cross-sectional pilot survey of author experiences

    No full text
    Abstract Background Although the peer review process is believed to ensure scientific rigor, enhance research quality, and improve manuscript clarity, many investigators are concerned that the process is too slow, too expensive, too unreliable, and too static. In this feasibility study, we sought to survey corresponding authors of recently published clinical research studies on the speed and efficiency of the publication process. Methods Web-based survey of corresponding authors of a 20% random sample of clinical research studies in MEDLINE-indexed journals with Ovid MEDLINE entry dates between December 1 and 15, 2016. Survey addressed perceived manuscript importance before first submission, approximate first submission and final acceptance dates, and total number of journal submissions, external peer reviews, external peer reviewers, and revisions requested, as well as whether authors would have considered publicly sharing their manuscript on an online platform instead of submitting to a peer-reviewed journal. Results Of 1780 surveys distributed, 27 corresponding authors opted out or requested that we stop emailing them and 149 emails failed (e.g., emails that bounced n = 64, returned with an away from office message n = 70, or were changed/incorrect n = 15), leaving 1604 respondents, of which 337 completed the survey (21.0%). Respondents and non-respondents were similar with respect to study type and publication journals’ impact factor, although non-respondent authors had more publications (p = 0.03). Among respondents, the median impact factor of the publications’ journal was 2.7 (interquartile range (IQR), 2.0–3.6) and corresponding authors’ median h-index and number of publications was 9 (IQR, 3–20) and 27 (IQR, 10–77), respectively. The median time from first submission to journal acceptance and publication was 5 months (IQR, 3–8) and 7 months (IQR, 5–12), respectively. Most respondents (62.0%, n = 209) rated the importance of their research as a 4 or 5 (5-point scale) prior to submission. Median number of journal submissions was 1 (IQR, 1–2), external peer reviews was 1 (IQR, 1–2), external peer reviewers was 3 (IQR, 2–4), and revisions requested was 1 (IQR, 1–1). Sharing manuscripts to a public online platform, instead of submitting to a peer-reviewed journal, would have been considered by 55.2% (n = 186) of respondents. Conclusion Corresponding authors have high perceptions of their research and reported requiring few manuscript submissions prior to journal acceptance, most commonly by lower impact factor journals

    Transparency of Regulatory Data across the European Medicines Agency, Health Canada, and US Food and Drug Administration

    No full text
    Based on an analysis of relevant laws and policies, regulator data portals, and information requests, we find that clinical data, including clinical study reports, submitted to the European Medicines Agency and Health Canada to support approval of medicines are routinely made publicly available
    corecore