Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2013 Nov;122(5):1077-1081.
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182a9ca67.

Exclusion of pregnant women from industry-sponsored clinical trials

Kristine E Shields  1 , Anne Drapkin Lyerly
Affiliations
Review

Exclusion of pregnant women from industry-sponsored clinical trials

Kristine E Shields et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Nov.

Abstract

Objective: The lack of human data available to inform evidence-based treatment for illness during pregnancy has led to calls for greater inclusion of pregnant women in research, but the extent of their current representation is poorly characterized. Our objective was to measure the current exclusion of pregnant women from industry-sponsored clinical trials as a baseline for future comparison.

Methods: We compiled data from studies enrolling women of childbearing potential posted on www.ClinicalTrials.gov between 1 October 2011 and 31 January 2012. The review was limited to open United States-based phase IV interventional studies sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry evaluating treatment of conditions that may be experienced by but are not limited to pregnant women and did not involve a medication classified as potentially teratogenic. If there was no mention of pregnancy in the inclusion or exclusion criteria, we contacted a study representative to confirm that pregnant women could be enrolled.

Results: Of 558 qualifying industry-sponsored studies, five (1%) were designed specifically for pregnant women. Of 367 phase IV clinical trials with verified inclusion and exclusion criteria, 348 (95%) excluded pregnant women and 19 (5%) did not.

Conclusion: We found the exclusion of pregnant women from industry-sponsored clinical trials to be common practice. Moving beyond reflexive exclusion and developing thoughtful criteria for inclusion of pregnant women in clinical research would likely advance the evidence base to inform treatment decisions during pregnancy and lead to better health outcomes for women and children.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Research involving women. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 377. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2007;110:731–6.
    1. Bourgeois FT, Murthy S, Mandl KD. Outcome reporting among drug trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov. Ann Intern Med 2010;153:158–66.
    1. Lyerly AD, Namey EE, Gray B, Swamy G, Faden RR. Women's views about participating in research while pregnant. IRB 2012;34:1–8.
    1. Rodger MA, Makropoulos D, Walker M, Keely E, Karovitch A, Wells PS. Participation of pregnant women in clinical trials: will they participate and why? Am J Perinatol 2003;20:69–6.
    1. Lyerly AD, Little M, Faden RR. Pregnancy and clinical research. Hastings Cent Rep 2008;38:53.

LinkOut - more resources