Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36466953›Full record

ReviewDigital biomarkers

Considerations for Analyzing and Interpreting Data from Biometric Monitoring Technologies in Clinical Trials.

Bohdana Ratitch, Isaac R Rodriguez-Chavez, Abhishek Dabral, Adriano Fontanari, Julio Vega, Francesco Onorati, Benjamin Vandendriessche, Stuart Morton, Yasaman Damestani

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Digital biomarkers. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Methods and protocols · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. 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

9 authors.

Bohdana RatitchStatistics and Data Insights, Bayer, Westmount, Québec, Canada.
Isaac R Rodriguez-ChavezStrategy Center for Decentralized Clinical Trials and Digital Medicine, Drug Development Solutions, ICON plc, Blue Bell, Pennsylvania, USA.
Abhishek DabralGlobal Development Operations, Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, California, USA.
Adriano FontanariProduct, PatchAi S.r.l., an Alira Health Company, Padua, Italy.
Julio VegaDepartment of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Francesco OnoratiApplied Data Science, Current Health, A Best Buy Health Company, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Benjamin VandendriesscheByteflies, Antwerp, Belgium & Department of Electrical, Computer and Systems Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Stuart MortonEmerging Digital Medicines, Eli Lilly & Co., Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
Yasaman DamestaniDigital Medicine, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Newton, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The proliferation and increasing maturity of biometric monitoring technologies allow clinical investigators to measure the health status of trial participants in a more holistic manner, especially outside of traditional clinical settings. This includes capturing meaningful aspects of health in daily living and a more granular and objective manner compared to traditional tools in clinical settings. Summary: Within multidisciplinary teams, statisticians and data scientists are increasingly involved in clinical trials that incorporate digital clinical measures. They are called upon to provide input into trial planning, generation of evidence on the clinical validity of novel clinical measures, and evaluation of the adequacy of existing evidence. Analysis objectives related to demonstrating clinical validity of novel clinical measures differ from typical objectives related to demonstrating safety and efficacy of therapeutic interventions using established measures which statisticians are most familiar with. Key Messages: This paper discusses key considerations for generating evidence for clinical validity through the lens of the type and intended use of a clinical measure. This paper also briefly discusses the regulatory pathways through which clinical validity evidence may be reviewed and highlights challenges that investigators may encounter while dealing with data from biometric monitoring technologies.

Indexed as

Biometric monitoring technologiesClinical trialsClinical validationDigital healthDigital medicineStatistics

Identifiers

PMID36466953
PMCPMC9716191

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.