Ana Marusic is a devoted contributor to WAME (and co-editor of the Journal of Global Health). She recently posted a link to a paper in which she was a co-author that deals with the completeness and changes in registered data regarding RCTs. \u00a0Although there are few RCTs in injury prevention (too few) the findings are important and troubling. It was hoped that the policy of requiring trials to be registered would minimize reporting bias because there was evidence that the results of some (presumably negative) trials were being suppressed.\u00a0 Her paper, published in PLOS online, is based on 149 reports of 152 randomized controlled trials. 9 items from the WHO 20-item Minimum Data Set relevant for assessing trial quality were compared using published vs registry data. The 152 RCTs had a total of 224 missing registry fields and one quarter of the RCTs had major changes in data entries. The \u201cnumber of RCTs with differences between registered and published data ranged from 21 (13.8%) for Study type to 118 (77.6%) for Target sample size.\u201d They concluded \u201c\u2026 \u00a0the registration data were often not adequate, underwent substantial changes in the registry over time. and differed in registered and published data. The main conclusion was that \u201cEditors need to establish quality control procedures \u2026 \u00a0to contribute to the increased transparency of clinical trials.\u201d<\/p>\n