Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26633964›Full record

ReviewGerman medical science : GMS e-journal2015

Navigating the maze of requirements for obtaining approval of non-interventional studies (NIS) in the European Union.

Isabelle Ramirez

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in German medical science : GMS e-journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A python's embrace? Insurance and the global clinical trial.Health research policy and systems · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Ethical review of patient safety and public health in EU clinical trials legislation: impact of COVID-19 pandemic.Romanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologie · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Isabelle RamirezZerimar Consulting, Munich, Germany.
Zen-Noh (Japan) · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe purpose of this article is to give an overview of the complexities and unexpected regulatory requirements for obtaining approval of multinational and multicentre non-interventional studies (NIS) in the European Union (EU).

methodsThe websites of national competent authorities (CAs), ethics committees (ECs) and data protection (DP) authorities were consulted to find regulations and guidance information related to the authorisation of NIS in various member states of the EU.

resultsMany additional hurdles, neither disclosed nor clear in the various regulations/guidances for NIS, were identified. Although approval from the CA is not needed for NIS, in many countries request of CA opinion is nevertheless recommended, prior to submission to the EC, to obtain confirmation that the planned NIS does not fall in the interventional trial category. Clinical trial insurance was required in some countries. In countries like Belgium and Italy, the multicentre NIS required the approval from a central EC and local ECs as a single central EC opinion was not considered sufficient. The EC document requirements for submission and the fees were extremely variable among all member states. Additional approvals from data protection authorities and insurance companies were required in some countries.

conclusionsThe process of obtaining approval for multicentre and multinational NIS is time consuming due to lack of transparency and the different regulatory requirements among member states. The EU pharmacovigilance legislation and clinical trial regulation No 536/2014 is a step forward in providing a regulatory framework for PASS (post-authorisation safety studies) and low intervention clinical trials, but since regulation No 536/2014 excludes NIS, it will be difficult to enforce harmonization of requirements for approval of NIS among member states.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchClinical Trials as TopicEthics Committees, ClinicalEthics Committees, ResearchEuropeEuropean UnionHumansInsuranceInternational CooperationMulticenter Studies as Topiccompetent authoritiesdata protection authoritiesethics committeenon-interventional studiesobservational studiesregulatory approval

Identifiers

PMID26633964
PMCPMC4649795
OpenAlexW2419456501

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.