African HIV/AIDS Trials Are More Likely to Report Adequate Allocation Concealment and Random Generation than North American Trials
2008

HIV/AIDS Trials in Africa vs North America: A Quality Comparison

Sample size: 190 publication 10 minutes Evidence: high

Author Information

Author(s): Siegfried Nandi, Michael Clarke, Jimmy Volmink, Lize Van der Merwe

Primary Institution: Clinical Trial Service Unit, University of Oxford

Hypothesis

Location may negatively impact on trial quality in regions where resources are scarce.

Conclusion

African trials report higher methodological quality than North American trials.

Supporting Evidence

  • African trials were three times more likely to report adequate allocation concealment.
  • African trials were twice as likely to report adequate generation of the sequence.
  • Most African trials are externally funded, possibly leading to stricter reporting standards.

Takeaway

This study found that trials for HIV/AIDS in Africa are often better reported than those in North America, possibly due to stricter funding requirements.

Methodology

The study compared the methodological quality of HIV/AIDS RCTs in Africa and North America using logistic regression analyses.

Potential Biases

Potential measurement bias may have been introduced due to reliance on reported data.

Limitations

The study's findings may not be causally related and are dependent on the quality of reporting.

Participant Demographics

Trials conducted in 18 countries in sub-Saharan Africa and North America.

Statistical Information

P-Value

p<0.01

Confidence Interval

95%CI: 1.59 to 6.59

Statistical Significance

p<0.01

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1371/journal.pone.0003491

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication