Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34135032›Full record

ReviewBMJ open2021

Realising the full potential of data-enabled trials in the UK: a call for action.

Matthew R Sydes, Yolanda Barbachano, Louise Bowman, Tom Denwood, Andrew Farmer, Steph Garfield-Birkbeck, Martin Gibson, Martin C Gulliford, David A Harrison, Catherine Hewitt and 19 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Embedding routine health care data in clinical trials: with great power comes great responsibility.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2024
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

29 authors.

Matthew R SydesMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK m.sydes@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-9323-1371
Yolanda BarbachanoMedicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), London, UK.
Louise BowmanMRC Clinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1125-8616
Tom DenwoodNHS Digital, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7337-2425
Andrew FarmerNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6170-4402
Steph Garfield-BirkbeckTrials and Studies Coordinating Centre, National Institute for Health Research Evaluation, Southampton, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3181-2840
Martin GibsonNorth West E‑Health (NWEH) Ltd, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1331-1524
Martin C GullifordKing's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1898-9075
David A HarrisonIntensive Care National Audit & Research Centre (ICNARC), London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9002-9098
Catherine HewittYork Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, The University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0415-3536
Jennifer LogueLancaster University, Lancaster, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9549-2738
Will NavaieHealth Research Authority, London, UK.
John NorrieEdinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9823-9252
Martin O'KaneMedicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), London, UK.
Jennifer K QuintDepartment of Respiratory Epidemiology, Occupational Medicine and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0149-4869
Jo Rycroft-MaloneLancaster University, Lancaster, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3858-5625
Jonathan SheffieldNIHR Clinical Research Network, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Liam SmeethDepartment of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9168-6022
Frank SullivanDivision of Population & Behavioural Science, University of St. Andrews, St Andrews, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6623-4964
Juliet TizzardHealth Research Authority, London, UK.
Paula WalkerMedicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), London, UK.
John WildingDepartment of Cardiovasular and Metabolic Medicine, Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2839-8404
Paula R WilliamsonDepartment of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9802-6636
Martin LandrayNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6646-827X
Andrew MorrisHealth Data Research UK, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1766-0473
Rhoswyn R WalkerHealth Data Research UK, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5605-2879
Hywel C WilliamsUniversity of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5646-3093
Janet ValentineClinical Practice Research Datalink, Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, London, UK.
Data Enabled Trials Group Workshop Group members

Funding

Cancer Research UK 16896Chief Scientist Office SCAF/17/01Medical Research Council MC_U137686860Medical Research Council MC_U137686861Medical Research Council MC_UU_00004/08Medical Research Council MC_UU_12023/24Medical Research Council MC_UU_12026/4Medical Research Council MR/S014357/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleClinical trials are the gold standard for testing interventions. COVID-19 has further raised their public profile and emphasised the need to deliver better, faster, more efficient trials for patient benefit. Considerable overlap exists between data required for trials and data already collected routinely in electronic healthcare records (EHRs). Opportunities exist to use these in innovative ways to decrease duplication of effort and speed trial recruitment, conduct and follow-up. APPROACH: The National Institute of Health Research (NIHR), Health Data Research UK and Clinical Practice Research Datalink co-organised a national workshop to accelerate the agenda for 'data-enabled clinical trials'. Showcasing successful examples and imagining future possibilities, the plenary talks, panel discussions, group discussions and case studies covered: design/feasibility; recruitment; conduct/follow-up; collecting benefits/harms; and analysis/interpretation. REFLECTION: Some notable studies have successfully accessed and used EHR to identify potential recruits, support randomised trials, deliver interventions and supplement/replace trial-specific follow-up. Some outcome measures are already reliably collected; others, like safety, need detailed work to meet regulatory reporting requirements. There is a clear need for system interoperability and a 'route map' to identify and access the necessary datasets. Researchers running regulatory-facing trials must carefully consider how data quality and integrity would be assessed. An experience-sharing forum could stimulate wider adoption of EHR-based methods in trial design and execution. DISCUSSION: EHR offer opportunities to better plan clinical trials, assess patients and capture data more efficiently, reducing research waste and increasing focus on each trial's specific challenges. The short-term emphasis should be on facilitating patient recruitment and for postmarketing authorisation trials where research-relevant outcome measures are readily collectable. Sharing of case studies is encouraged. The workshop directly informed NIHR's funding call for ambitious data-enabled trials at scale. There is the opportunity for the UK to build upon existing data science capabilities to identify, recruit and monitor patients in trials at scale.

Indexed as

COVID-19HumansPatient SelectionSARS-CoV-2United Kingdomclinical trialshealth informaticsstatistics & research methods

Identifiers

PMID34135032
PMCPMC8211043

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.