Ensuring the reporting of clinical research is essential to informed evidence generation in medicine. The UK has seen politicians, funders, and other stakeholder focus on transparency which has translated to pressure on sponsors to ensure greater transparency of their research. This study aimed to collect the institutional perspective to transparency issues in clinical research. Past research on publication bias has largely focused on investigators, however the institutions that house these investigators create the environments which can promote more open and transparent research, including ensuring the reporting of results. In this study, I conducted structured interviews with professionals working in research governance, trial management, and administrative leadership positions to understand how their practice and policies have changed in recent years. This includes understanding motivations for change, how best practices are developed and shared, and barriers to improvement. This collection includes 12 interviews with 14 participants across 11 research institutions. All participants agreed to the sharing on anonymised transcripts on the ReShare service during the informed consent process.This study aimed to gain a better understanding of how UK public research institutions (Universities and NHS Trusts) manage the registration and reporting of clinical trials. Parliamentary committees, EU rules and Brexit, and COVID have all impacted transparency practice in the UK. Understanding the response to these pressures offers valuable insights into transparency at public research institutions. Documenting and analysing these experiences can help identify best practices and barriers as the UK prepares to reform its newly independent regulatory infrastructure.

Semi-structured interviews conducted via online video chat software. All interviews lasted for approximated 60 minutes and were conducted by the same interviewer.