ArticleHaemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia2020
Challenges and key lessons from the design and implementation of an international haemophilia registry supported by a pharmaceutical company.
Article in Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Concizumab prophylaxis in persons with hemophilia A or B with inhibitors: patient-reported outcome results from the phase 3 explorer7 study.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2024Article
- Building the foundation for a community-generated national research blueprint for inherited bleeding disorders: research priorities in health services; diversity, equity, and inclusion; and implementation science.Expert review of hematology · 2023Article
- Challenges and key lessons from the design and implementation of an international haemophilia registry supported by a pharmaceutical company.Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 9 institutions in 8 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionReal-world data are lacking regarding the relationship between prospectively collected patient-reported outcomes (PROs), clinical outcomes and treatment in people with haemophilia (PWH). The Expanding Communications on Hemophilia A Outcomes (ECHO) registry was designed to address this data gap, but a range of difficulties led to early study closure.
aimTo describe the challenges faced and lessons learned from implementing a multinational haemophilia registry.
methodsThe Expanding Communications on Hemophilia A Outcomes was planned as a five-year observational cohort study to collect data from 2000 patients in nine countries. Based on direct observations, feedback from patients enrolled in ECHO, challenges of the study design and input from study-sponsor representatives, the ECHO Steering Committee systematically identified the challenges faced and developed recommendations for overcoming or avoiding them in future studies.
resultsThe study closed after two years because few countries were activated and patient recruitment was low. This was related to multiple challenges including delayed implementation, stringent pharmacovigilance requirements, objections of investigators and patients to the burden of multiple PROs, data collection issues, lack of resources at study sites, little engagement of patients and competing clinical trials, which further limited recruitment. At study closure, 269 patients had been enrolled in four of nine participating countries.
conclusionsResearchers planning studies similar to ECHO may want to consider the barriers identified in this global registry of PWH and suggestions to mitigate these limitations, such as greater patient involvement in design and analysis, clearer assessment and understanding of local infrastructure and potential changes to the administration of the study.
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.