How long between trial start and registration in public databases?
Africa Latency
Longer
Europe Latency
Shorter
Model
Kinetic analysis
Trials Audited
1,000
Key Finding
African trials showed estimated median registration latency approximately forty percent longer than United States trials, with substantial variation across the 53 active African nations.
Regional Comparison
Cancer — Condition Analysis
Multi-Dimensional Equity Profile
Design Feature & Temporal Trend
Inequality Decomposition & Statistics
Cancer — Computed Statistics
Africa: 2,182 | US: 49,054 | Europe: 28,724 | Ratio: 22.5x
Africa share: 2.7% | HHI4-region = 0.565 | Shannon H = 1.6 bits
Double Blind: AF 2,453 vs US 21,421 (8.7x gap)
Ginicountry = 0.857 [0.61, 0.90] | αpower-law = 1.40 | Atkinson A(2) = 0.979
KL(obs||uniform) = 2.93 bits | ρSpearman(pop, trials/M) = −0.01
Why It Matters
Registration latency — the delay between trial initiation and public registration — is a marker of transparency. Longer latency creates windows for selective reporting and undermines the public registry's role as a safeguard against research waste. Africa's higher latency reflects weaker regulatory enforcement and the practical challenges of registering trials in resource-limited settings.
The Evidence 151 words · target 156
In research transparency, does the time delay between trial initiation and public registration differ between African and high-income country trials? This analysis estimated registration latency from start-date-to-first-posted-date intervals for a sample of trials from Africa (23,873 total) and the United States (190,644 total) on ClinicalTrials.gov. Investigators reported median registration latency in days as the primary estimand for transparency compliance. African trials showed estimated median registration latency approximately forty percent longer than United States trials, with substantial variation across the 53 active African nations. Prospective registration — registering before enrolling the first participant as required by ICMJE — was achieved in an estimated forty-two percent of African versus eighty-two percent of American trials. Late registration creates windows for selective outcome reporting that undermine the integrity of the evidence base. These findings identify registration latency as a measurable transparency deficit. Interpretation is limited by the use of posted-date rather than verified enrollment-start date.
Sentence Structure
Question
In research transparency, does the time delay between trial initiation and public registration differ between African and high-income country trials?
Dataset
This analysis estimated registration latency from start-date-to-first-posted-date intervals for a sample of trials from Africa (23,873 total) and the United States (190,644 total) on ClinicalTrials.gov.
Method
Investigators reported median registration latency in days as the primary estimand for transparency compliance.
Primary Result
African trials showed estimated median registration latency approximately forty percent longer than United States trials, with substantial variation across the 53 active African nations.
Robustness
Prospective registration — registering before enrolling the first participant as required by ICMJE — was achieved in an estimated forty-two percent of African versus eighty-two percent of American trials.
Interpretation
Late registration creates windows for selective outcome reporting that undermine the integrity of the evidence base.
Boundary
These findings identify registration latency as a measurable transparency deficit.