Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33094894›Full record

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.

Charles R M Hay, Midori Shima, Michael Makris, Victor Jiménez-Yuste, Johannes Oldenburg, Kathelijn Fischer, Alfonso Iorio, Mark W Skinner, Elena Santagostino, Sylvia von Mackensen and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

11 authors at 9 institutions in 8 countries.

Charles R M HayManchester University Department of Haematology, Manchester, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0162-6828
Midori ShimaNara Medical University, Kashihara, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5922-7061
Michael MakrisDepartment of Infection, Immunity, and Cardiovascular Disease, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7622-7939
Victor Jiménez-YusteAutónoma University Madrid and La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Johannes OldenburgDepartment of Experimental Haematology and Transfusion Medicine, University Clinic Bonn, Bonn, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1585-4100
Kathelijn Fischervan Creveldkliniek, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7126-6613
Alfonso IorioDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3331-8766
Mark W SkinnerDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0934-0680
Elena SantagostinoIRCCS Cà Granda Foundation, Maggiore Hospital Policlinico, Milan, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9639-6422
Sylvia von MackensenDepartment of Medical Psychology, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5926-0478
Craig M KesslerGeorgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA.
Impact · CAFondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico · ITGeorgetown University · USHospital Universitario La Paz · ESNara Medical University · JPUniversität Hamburg · DEUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NLUniversity of Manchester · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GB

Funding

Bayer
6 · The paper itself

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

FemaleHemophilia AHumansMalePharmaceutical PreparationsRegistriesPharmaceutical Preparationsclinical outcomehaemophiliamultinationalpatient-reported outcomeregistrystudy design

Identifiers

PMID33094894
PMCPMC7894355
OpenAlexW3093555540

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.