ReviewGerman medical science : GMS e-journal2015
Navigating the maze of requirements for obtaining approval of non-interventional studies (NIS) in the European Union.
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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A python's embrace? Insurance and the global clinical trial.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Ethical and research governance approval across Europe: Experiences from three European palliative care studies.Palliative medicine · 2020Article
- Data Collection in Multiple Sclerosis: The MSDS Approach.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Article
- 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 · 2020Article
- Research Ethics in the European Influenzanet Consortium: Scoping Review.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2018Article
- Lessons learned on the design and the conduct of Post-Authorization Safety Studies: review of 3 years of PRAC oversight.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2017Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.