Results dissemination in registered interventional studies for optic neuropathy: a cross-sectional study

Background A lack of public availability of trial results may lead to limited understanding of intervention efficacy. This registry-based analysis investigated the proportion of trials lacking public results dissemination, either via registry posting or journal publication, among ClinicalTrials.gov-registered optic neuropathy interventional studies.Research design and methods In June 2025, ClinicalTrials.gov was searched for interventional optic neuropathy studies. Primary outcome was proportion of trials lacking any public results dissemination across all records. Rates of studies lacking publicly available results across primary endpoint significance and study characteristics were compared. Primary endpoint significance was based on primary endpoint significance (p < 0.05) in journal publication or ClinicalTrials.gov results, or on first reported outcome.Results Overall, 92/170 trials (n = 5,042 participants) met criteria. Among public studies reporting primary outcomes, 24/35 showed significant results (p = 0.041 vs null 50%; 95% CI, 0.507–0.831). While univariable analyses found that larger enrollment, industry sponsorship, and later study phase were significantly associated with publicly available result status, none of these associations remained statistically significant in multivariable logistic regression (all p > 0.05).Conclusions In univariable analyses, larger enrollment, later-phase design, and commercial sponsorship associated with greater result dissemination, though associations did not persist in multivariable regression.