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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kimberly A. Mc Cord, Rustam Al-Shahi Salman, Shaun Treweek, Heidi Gardner, Daniel Strech, William Whiteley, John P. A. Ioannidis, Lars G. Hemkens
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