Reporting on data monitoring committees in neonatal randomised controlled trials is inconsistent

Aim: To evaluate the reported use of Data Monitoring Committees (DMCs), the frequency of interim analysis, pre-specified stopping rules and early trial termination in neonatal randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: We reviewed neonatal RCTs published in four high impact general medical journals, specifically looking at safety issues including documented involvement of a DMC, stated interim analysis, stopping rules and early trial termination. We searched all journal issues over an 11-year period (2003-2013) and recorded predefined parameters on each item for RCTs meeting inclusion criteria. Results: Seventy neonatal trials were identified in four general medical journals: Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), British Medical Journal and Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA). 43 (61.4%) studies reported the presence of a DMC, 36 (51.4%) explicitly mentioned interim analysis; stopping rules were reported in 15 (21.4%) RCTs and 7 (10%) trials were terminated early. The NEJM most frequently reported these parameters compared to the other three journals reviewed. Conclusion: While the majority of neonatal RCTs report on DMC involvement and interim analysis there is still scope for improvement. Clear documentation of safety related issues should be a central component of reporting in neonatal trials involving newborn infants.

Options to advance co-ordination and analysis of climate data in Europe

Systematic, high-quality observations of the atmosphere, oceans and terrestrial environments are required to improve understanding of climate characteristics and the consequences of climate change. The overall aim of this report is to carry out a comparative assessment of approaches taken to addressing the state of European observations systems and related data analysis by some leading actors in the field. This research reports on approaches to climate observations and analyses in Ireland, Switzerland, Germany, The Netherlands and Austria and explores options for a more coordinated approach to national responses to climate observations in Europe. The key aspects addressed are: an assessment of approaches to develop GCOS and provision of analysis of GCOS data; an evaluation of how these countries are reporting development of GCOS; highlighting best practice in advancing GCOS implementation including analysis of Essential Climate Variables (ECVs); a comparative summary of the differences and synergies in terms of the reporting of climate observations; an overview of relevant European initiatives and recommendations on how identified gaps might be addressed in the short to medium term.