ArticleTrials2010
The Health Informatics Trial Enhancement Project (HITE): Using routinely collected primary care data to identify potential participants for a depression trial.
Article in Trials, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Use of routine healthcare data in randomised implementation trials: a methodological mixed-methods systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2023Pooled it
- Case-finding for common mental disorders in primary care using routinely collected data: a systematic review.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2019Pooled it
- Employing computers for the recruitment into clinical trials: a comprehensive systematic review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2014Pooled it
- Recruitment in Appalachian, Rural and Older Adult Populations in an Artificial Intelligence World: Study Using Human-Mediated Follow-Up.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Review
- Diagnosing major depressive disorder and substance use disorder using the electronic health record: A preliminary validation study.Journal of mood and anxiety disorders · 2023Article
- Using routinely recorded data in a UK RCT: a comparison to standard prospective data collection methods.Trials · 2021Article
- Digital tools for the recruitment and retention of participants in randomised controlled trials: a systematic map.Trials · 2020Review
- Shining the light on eating disorders, incidence, prognosis and profiling of patients in primary and secondary care: national data linkage study.The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science · 2020Article
- Using routinely recorded data in the UK to assess outcomes in a randomised controlled trial: The Trials of Access.Trials · 2017Review
- Leveraging the EHR4CR platform to support patient inclusion in academic studies: challenges and lessons learned.BMC medical research methodology · 2017Article
- Defining adolescent common mental disorders using electronic primary care data: a comparison with outcomes measured using the CIS-R.BMJ open · 2016Article
- Article
- Case-finding for common mental disorders of anxiety and depression in primary care: an external validation of routinely collected data.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2016Article
- Relationships between obesity management and depression management in a university-based family medicine center.Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners · 2015Article
- Developing a new model for patient recruitment in mental health services: a cohort study using Electronic Health Records.BMJ open · 2014Article
- Article
- A case study of the Secure Anonymous Information Linkage (SAIL) Gateway: a privacy-protecting remote access system for health-related research and evaluation.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2014Article
- Article
- Article
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
backgroundRecruitment to clinical trials can be challenging. We identified anonymous potential participants to an existing pragmatic randomised controlled depression trial to assess the feasibility of using routinely collected data to identify potential trial participants. We discuss the strengths and limitations of this approach, assess its potential value, report challenges and ethical issues encountered.
methodsSwansea University's Health Information Research Unit's Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) database of routinely collected health records was interrogated, using Structured Query Language (SQL). Read codes were used to create an algorithm of inclusion/exclusion criteria with which to identify suitable anonymous participants. Two independent clinicians rated the eligibility of the potential participants' identified. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using the kappa statistic and inter-class correlation.
resultsThe study population (N = 37263) comprised all adults registered at five general practices in Swansea UK. Using the algorithm 867 anonymous potential participants were identified. The sensitivity and specificity results > 0.9 suggested a high degree of accuracy from the algorithm. The inter-rater reliability results indicated strong agreement between the confirming raters. The Intra Class Correlation Coefficient (Cronbach's Alpha) > 0.9, suggested excellent agreement and Kappa coefficient > 0.8; almost perfect agreement.
conclusionsThis proof of concept study showed that routinely collected primary care data can be used to identify potential participants for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial of folate augmentation of antidepressant therapy for the treatment of depression. Further work will be needed to assess generalisability to other conditions and settings and the inclusion of this approach to support Electronic Enhanced Recruitment (EER).
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.