Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17577410›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2007

Automated inter-rater reliability assessment and electronic data collection in a multi-center breast cancer study.

Soe Soe Thwin, Kerri M Clough-Gorr, Maribet C McCarty, Timothy L Lash, Sharon H Alford, Diana S M Buist, Shelley M Enger, Terry S Field, Floyd Frost, Feifei Wei and 1 more

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Fracture risk in older, long-term survivors of early-stage breast cancer.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2013
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Breast cancer recurrence in older women five to ten years after diagnosis.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2009
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Soe Soe ThwinGeriatrics Section, Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. sst@bu.edu
Kerri M Clough-Gorr
Maribet C McCarty
Timothy L Lash
Sharon H Alford
Diana S M Buist
Shelley M Enger
Terry S Field
Floyd Frost
Feifei Wei
Rebecca A Silliman

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe choice between paper data collection methods and electronic data collection (EDC) methods has become a key question for clinical researchers. There remains a need to examine potential benefits, efficiencies, and innovations associated with an EDC system in a multi-center medical record review study.

methodsA computer-based automated menu-driven system with 658 data fields was developed for a cohort study of women aged 65 years or older, diagnosed with invasive histologically confirmed primary breast cancer (N = 1859), at 6 Cancer Research Network sites. Medical record review with direct data entry into the EDC system was implemented. An inter-rater and intra-rater reliability (IRR) system was developed using a modified version of the EDC.

resultsAutomation of EDC accelerated the flow of study information and resulted in an efficient data collection process. Data collection time was reduced by approximately four months compared to the project schedule and funded time available for manuscript preparation increased by 12 months. In addition, an innovative modified version of the EDC permitted an automated evaluation of inter-rater and intra-rater reliability across six data collection sites.

conclusionAutomated EDC is a powerful tool for research efficiency and innovation, especially when multiple data collection sites are involved.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchAgedBreast NeoplasmsCohort StudiesDatabase Management SystemsData CollectionElectronic Data ProcessingFemaleHumansObserver VariationOrganizational InnovationReproducibility of ResultsResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID17577410
PMCPMC1919388

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.