Routinely collected data for randomized trials: promises, barriers, and implications
Abstract Background Routinely collected health data (RCD) are increasingly used for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This can provide three major benefits: increasing value through better feasibility (reducing costs, time, and resources), expanding the research agenda (performing trials for rese...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2018-01-01
|
Series: | Trials |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13063-017-2394-5 |
id |
doaj-6d20de21f1524852ae33a9a3ffcc58ac |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-6d20de21f1524852ae33a9a3ffcc58ac2020-11-24T22:03:16ZengBMCTrials1745-62152018-01-011911910.1186/s13063-017-2394-5Routinely collected data for randomized trials: promises, barriers, and implicationsKimberly A. Mc Cord0Rustam Al-Shahi Salman1Shaun Treweek2Heidi Gardner3Daniel Strech4William Whiteley5John P. A. Ioannidis6Lars G. Hemkens7Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics (CEB), Department of Clinical Research, University Hospital Basel, University of BaselCentre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of EdinburghHealth Services Research Unit, University of AberdeenHealth Services Research Unit, University of AberdeenInstitute for History, Ethics and Philosophy of Medicine, Hannover Medical SchoolCentre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of EdinburghStanford Prevention Research Center, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of MedicineBasel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics (CEB), Department of Clinical Research, University Hospital Basel, University of BaselAbstract Background Routinely collected health data (RCD) are increasingly used for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This can provide three major benefits: increasing value through better feasibility (reducing costs, time, and resources), expanding the research agenda (performing trials for research questions otherwise not amenable to trials), and offering novel design and data collection options (e.g., point-of-care trials and other designs directly embedded in routine care). However, numerous hurdles and barriers must be considered pertaining to regulatory, ethical, and data aspects, as well as the costs of setting up the RCD infrastructure. Methodological considerations may be different from those in traditional RCTs: RCD are often collected by individuals not involved in the study and who are therefore blinded to the allocation of trial participants. Another consideration is that RCD trials may lead to greater misclassification biases or dilution effects, although these may be offset by randomization and larger sample sizes. Finally, valuable insights into external validity may be provided when using RCD because it allows pragmatic trials to be performed. Methods We provide an overview of the promises, challenges, and potential barriers, methodological implications, and research needs regarding RCD for RCTs. Results RCD have substantial potential for improving the conduct and reducing the costs of RCTs, but a multidisciplinary approach is essential to address emerging practical barriers and methodological implications. Conclusions Future research should be directed toward such issues and specifically focus on data quality validation, alternative research designs and how they affect outcome assessment, and aspects of reporting and transparency.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13063-017-2394-5Routinely collected health dataElectronic health recordsRegistriesEvidence-based medicineTrialsClinical epidemiology |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Kimberly A. Mc Cord Rustam Al-Shahi Salman Shaun Treweek Heidi Gardner Daniel Strech William Whiteley John P. A. Ioannidis Lars G. Hemkens |
spellingShingle |
Kimberly A. Mc Cord Rustam Al-Shahi Salman Shaun Treweek Heidi Gardner Daniel Strech William Whiteley John P. A. Ioannidis Lars G. Hemkens Routinely collected data for randomized trials: promises, barriers, and implications Trials Routinely collected health data Electronic health records Registries Evidence-based medicine Trials Clinical epidemiology |
author_facet |
Kimberly A. Mc Cord Rustam Al-Shahi Salman Shaun Treweek Heidi Gardner Daniel Strech William Whiteley John P. A. Ioannidis Lars G. Hemkens |
author_sort |
Kimberly A. Mc Cord |
title |
Routinely collected data for randomized trials: promises, barriers, and implications |
title_short |
Routinely collected data for randomized trials: promises, barriers, and implications |
title_full |
Routinely collected data for randomized trials: promises, barriers, and implications |
title_fullStr |
Routinely collected data for randomized trials: promises, barriers, and implications |
title_full_unstemmed |
Routinely collected data for randomized trials: promises, barriers, and implications |
title_sort |
routinely collected data for randomized trials: promises, barriers, and implications |
publisher |
BMC |
series |
Trials |
issn |
1745-6215 |
publishDate |
2018-01-01 |
description |
Abstract Background Routinely collected health data (RCD) are increasingly used for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This can provide three major benefits: increasing value through better feasibility (reducing costs, time, and resources), expanding the research agenda (performing trials for research questions otherwise not amenable to trials), and offering novel design and data collection options (e.g., point-of-care trials and other designs directly embedded in routine care). However, numerous hurdles and barriers must be considered pertaining to regulatory, ethical, and data aspects, as well as the costs of setting up the RCD infrastructure. Methodological considerations may be different from those in traditional RCTs: RCD are often collected by individuals not involved in the study and who are therefore blinded to the allocation of trial participants. Another consideration is that RCD trials may lead to greater misclassification biases or dilution effects, although these may be offset by randomization and larger sample sizes. Finally, valuable insights into external validity may be provided when using RCD because it allows pragmatic trials to be performed. Methods We provide an overview of the promises, challenges, and potential barriers, methodological implications, and research needs regarding RCD for RCTs. Results RCD have substantial potential for improving the conduct and reducing the costs of RCTs, but a multidisciplinary approach is essential to address emerging practical barriers and methodological implications. Conclusions Future research should be directed toward such issues and specifically focus on data quality validation, alternative research designs and how they affect outcome assessment, and aspects of reporting and transparency. |
topic |
Routinely collected health data Electronic health records Registries Evidence-based medicine Trials Clinical epidemiology |
url |
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13063-017-2394-5 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT kimberlyamccord routinelycollecteddataforrandomizedtrialspromisesbarriersandimplications AT rustamalshahisalman routinelycollecteddataforrandomizedtrialspromisesbarriersandimplications AT shauntreweek routinelycollecteddataforrandomizedtrialspromisesbarriersandimplications AT heidigardner routinelycollecteddataforrandomizedtrialspromisesbarriersandimplications AT danielstrech routinelycollecteddataforrandomizedtrialspromisesbarriersandimplications AT williamwhiteley routinelycollecteddataforrandomizedtrialspromisesbarriersandimplications AT johnpaioannidis routinelycollecteddataforrandomizedtrialspromisesbarriersandimplications AT larsghemkens routinelycollecteddataforrandomizedtrialspromisesbarriersandimplications |
_version_ |
1725832331961303040 |