ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA
A technical infrastructure to conduct randomized database studies facilitated by a general practice research database.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Data Element-Function Conceptual Model for Data Quality Checks.EGEMS (Washington, DC) · 2019Article
- Quality improvement in postoperative pain management: results from the QUIPS project.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2008Article
- Configuration challenges: implementing translational research policies in electronic medical records.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2007Article
- Computerized extraction of information on the quality of diabetes care from free text in electronic patient records of general practitioners.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIAArticle
- Implementing Single Source: the STARBRITE proof-of-concept study.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIAArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
General practice research databases are increasingly used to study intended and unintended effects of treatments. However, confounding by indication remains a major problem. The randomized database study methodology has been proposed as a method to combine the strengths of observational database (generalizability) and the strength of the randomized clinical trial (RCT) design (randomization). We developed an infrastructure that enables the execution of randomized database studies with treatment randomization facilitated by a general practice research database. The requirements posed by the methodology of randomized database studies were facilitated by software components. Our assessment showed that it is technically possible to conduct randomized trials in general practice according to the randomized database design. The infrastructure facilitated the conduct of randomized database studies in general practice but some practical difficulties and methodological issues remain. The technical infrastructure seems to be both promising and potentially feasible to facilitate future randomized database studies, although the methodology needs to be evaluated in more detail.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.