ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021
The Quality Evaluation of Rare Disease Registries-An Assessment of the Essential Features of a Disease Registry.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deciding "what" to screen for and "when": The importance of natural history information.American journal of human genetics · 2026Review
- Extracting homogenous data from heterogenous diseases: RaraSwed, the Swedish national rare disease quality registry.BMC global and public health · 2026Review
- Development of the first myasthenia gravis patient registry in Latvia: a single-centre experience.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Opportunities and challenges in automated coding of electronic health records: a pilot study for rare disease registries.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- The Chronic Angioedema Registry: what the first 2 years since the implementation of the global registry have taught us.Frontiers in allergy · 2026Article
- Data accuracy in the European Cystic Fibrosis Society Patient Registry: results of an on-site data validation project.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2025Article
- The role of public health in rare diseases: hemophilia as an example.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
- Scoping review of the recommendations and guidance for improving the quality of rare disease registries.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2024Article
- Informing a national rare disease registry strategy in Australia: a mixed methods study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- GLUT1-DS Italian registry: past, present, and future: a useful tool for rare disorders.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2023Article
- Hereditary Endocrine Tumor Registries.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2023Article
- Challenges in mapping European rare disease databases, relevant for ML-based screening technologies in terms of organizational, FAIR and legal principles: scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Rare Disease Registries Are Key to Evidence-Based Personalized Medicine: Highlighting the European Experience.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Review
- Global Registries in Congenital Hyperinsulinism.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Rare disease (RD) registries aim to promote data collection and sharing, and facilitate multidisciplinary collaboration with the overall aim of improving patient care. Recommendations relating to the minimum standards necessary to develop and maintain high quality registries are essential to ensure high quality data and sustainability of registries. The aim of this international study was to survey RD registry leaders to ascertain the level of consensus amongst the RD community regarding the quality criteria that should be considered essential features of a disease registry. Of 35 respondents representing 40 RD registries, over 95% indicated that essential quality criteria should include establishment of a good governance system (ethics approval, registry management team, standard operating protocol and long-term sustainability plan), data quality (personnel responsible for data entry and procedures for checking data quality) and construction of an IT infrastructure complying with Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable (FAIR) principles to maintain registries of high quality, with procedures for authorized user access, erasing personal data, data breach procedures and a web interface. Of the 22 registries that performed a self-assessment, over 80% stated that their registry had a leader, project management group, steering committee, active funding stream, website, and user access policies. This survey has acceptability amongst the RD community for the self-quality evaluation of RD registries with high levels of consensus for the proposed quality criteria.
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.