Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35171985›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2022

Evaluating fitness-for-use of electronic health records in pragmatic clinical trials: reported practices and recommendations.

Sudha R Raman, Emily C O'Brien, Bradley G Hammill, Adam J Nelson, Laura J Fish, Lesley H Curtis, Keith Marsolo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors.

Sudha R RamanDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8659-189X
Emily C O'BrienDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8257-7561
Bradley G HammillDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Adam J NelsonDuke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Laura J FishDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7296-3063
Lesley H CurtisDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Keith MarsoloDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.

Funding

Women's Cancer Research ProgramP30CA014236 · NCI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI DONNA NIEDZWIECKI · 1985 to 2026
$174.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014236
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo empirically explore how pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) that used real-world data (RWD) assessed study-specific fitness-for-use.

methodsWe conducted interviews and surveys with PCT teams who used electronic health record (EHR) data to ascertain endpoints. The survey cataloged key concerns about RWD, activities used to assess data fitness-for-use, and related barriers encountered by study teams. Patterns and commonalities across trials were used to develop recommendations for study-specific fitness-for-use assessments.

resultsOf 15 invited trial teams, 7 interviews were conducted. Of 31 invited trials, 15 responded to the survey. Most respondents had prior experience using RWD (93%). Major concerns about EHR data were data reliability, missingness or incompleteness of EHR elements, variation in data quality across study sites, and presence of implausible or incorrect values. Although many PCTs conducted fitness-for-use activities (eg, data quality assessments, 11/14, 79%), less than a quarter did so before choosing a data source. Fitness-for-use activities, findings, and resulting study design changes were not often publically documented. Overall costs and personnel costs were barriers to fitness-for-use assessments. DISCUSSION: These results support three recommendations for PCTs that use EHR data for endpoint ascertainment. Trials should detail the rationale and plan for study-specific fitness-for-use activities, conduct study-specific fitness-for-use assessments early in the prestudy phase to inform study design changes before the trial begins, and share results of fitness-for-use assessments and description of relevant challenges and facilitators.

conclusionThese recommendations can help researchers and end-users of real-world evidence improve characterization of RWD reliability and relevance in the PCT-specific context.

Indexed as

Data AccuracyElectronic Health RecordsReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignSurveys and Questionnairesdata accuracyelectronic health recordspragmatic clinical trials as topicresearch design

Identifiers

PMID35171985
PMCPMC9006695

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.