ReviewClinical and translational science2023
Digital technologies: Innovations that transform the face of drug development.
Review in Clinical and translational science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparative Effectiveness of Digital Health Technologies in Tuberculosis Treatment: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2025Pooled it
- Identifying Concepts of Physical Activity Which Are Clinically Meaningful to Patients and Care Providers: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Research.Clinical and translational science · 2025Pooled it
- Wearable devices and cardiovascular health: revolutionizing remote monitoring and disease prevention.European heart journal · 2026Review
- Advancing the Integration of Digital Health Technologies in the Drug Development Ecosystem.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Regulatory considerations for successful implementation of digital endpoints in clinical trials for drug development.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Addressing the need for standardization of symptomatic medication documentation in Parkinson's disease clinical research: A call to action.Journal of Parkinson's disease · 2025Review
- Regulatory Pathways for Qualification and Acceptance of Digital Health Technology-Derived Clinical Trial Endpoints: Considerations for Sponsors.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Review
- Syndication in science: Curated collaboration.Clinical and translational science · 2024Review
- Implementing sensor-based digital health technologies in clinical trials: Key considerations from the eCOA Consortium.Clinical and translational science · 2024Review
- Novel and Proven Models of Public, Private, and Public-Private Partnerships in Healthcare: An Update.Handbook of experimental pharmacology · 2024Review
- Digital technologies: Innovations that transform the face of drug development.Clinical and translational science · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently, digital health technologies (DHTs) and digital biomarkers have gained a lot of traction in clinical investigations, motivating sponsors, investigators, and regulators to discuss and implement integrated approaches for deploying DHTs. These new tools present new and unique challenges for optimal technology integration in clinical trial processes, including operational, ethical, and regulatory issues. In this paper, we gathered different perspectives to discuss challenges and perspectives from three different stakeholders: industry, US regulators, and a public-private partnership consortium. The complexities of DHT implementation, which include regulatory definitions, defining the scope of validation experiments, and the need for partnerships between BioPharma and the technology sectors, are highlighted. Most of these challenges are related to translation of DHT-derived measures into endpoints that are meaningful to clinicians and patients, participant safety, training, and retention and privacy of data. The example of the Wearable Assessments in the Clinic and Home in PD (WATCH-PD) study is discussed as an example that demonstrated the advantages of pre-competitive collaborations, which include early regulatory feedback, data sharing, and multistakeholder alignment. Future advances in DHTs are expected to spur device-agnostic measured development and incorporate patient reported outcomes in drug development. More efforts are needed to define validation experiments for a defined context of use, incentivize data sharing and development of data standards. Multistakeholder collaborations via precompetitive consortia will help facilitate broad acceptance of DHT-enabled measures in drug development.
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.