ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2011
Data standards in diabetes patient registries.
Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Harnessing Digital Health Technologies to Remotely Manage Diabetic Foot Syndrome: A Narrative Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Review
- A roadmap to using historical controls in clinical trials - by Drug Information Association Adaptive Design Scientific Working Group (DIA-ADSWG).Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2020Review
- Diabetes self-care in primary health facilities in India - challenges and the way forward.World journal of diabetes · 2019Review
- Identifying diabetes cases in health administrative databases: a validation study based on a large French cohort.International journal of public health · 2019Article
- Electronic health records and the evolution of diabetes care: a narrative review.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2015Review
- The NIH Office of Rare Diseases Research patient registry Standard: a report from the University of New Mexico's Oculopharyngeal Muscular Dystrophy Patient Registry.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2013Article
- Article
- Construction of a multisite DataLink using electronic health records for the identification, surveillance, prevention, and management of diabetes mellitus: the SUPREME-DM project.Preventing chronic disease · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Widespread adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) and expansion of patient registries present opportunities to improve patient care and population health and advance translational research. However, optimal integration of patient registries with EHR functions and aggregation of regional registries to support national or global analyses will require the use of standards. Currently, there are no standards for patient registries and no content standards for health care data collection or clinical research, including diabetes research. Data standards can facilitate new registry development by supporting reuse of well-defined data elements and data collection systems, and they can enable data aggregation for future research and discovery. This article introduces standardization topics relevant to diabetes patient registries, addresses issues related to the quality and use of registries and their integration with primary EHR data collection systems, and proposes strategies for implementation of data standards in diabetes research and management.
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.