ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2022
Using passive extraction of real-world data from eConsent, electronic patient reported outcomes (ePRO) and electronic health record (EHR) data loaded to an electronic data capture (EDC) system for a multi-center, prospective, observational study in diabetic patients.
Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2022. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence and Prevalence of Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria Among Adult and Pediatric Populations in the United States.Advances in therapy · 2025Article
- Automated Electronic Health Record to Electronic Data Capture Transfer in Clinical Studies in the German Health Care System: Feasibility Study and Gap Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Observational
- A survey of United States adult privacy perspectives and willingness to share real-world data.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As clinical trial complexity has increased over the past decade, using electronic methods to simplify recruitment and data management have been investigated. In this study, the Optum Digital Research Network (DRN) has demonstrated the use of electronic source (eSource) data to ease subject identification, recruitment burden, and used data extracted from electronic health records (EHR) to load to an electronic data capture (EDC) system. This study utilized electronic Informed Consent, electronic patient reported outcomes (SF-12) and included three sites using 3 different EHR systems. Patients with type 2 diabetes with an HbA1c ≥ 7.0% treated with metformin monotherapy were recruited. Endpoints consisted of changes in HbA1c, medications, and quality of life measures over 12-weeks of study participation using data from the subjects' eSources listed above. The study began in June of 2020 and the last patient last visit occurred in January of 2021. Forty-eight participants were consented and enrolled. HbA1c was repeated for 33 and ePRO was obtained from all subjects at baseline and 28 at 12-week follow-up. Using eSource data eliminated transcription errors. Medication changes, healthcare encounters and lab results were identified when they occurred in standard clinical practice from the EHR systems. Minimal data transformation and normalization was required. Data for this observational trial where clinical outcomes are available using lab results, diagnoses, and encounters may be achieved via direct access to eSources. This methodology was successful and could be expanded for larger trials and will significantly reduce staff effort and exemplified clinical research as a care option.
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.