Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37316249›Full record

ArticleBMJ health & care informatics2023

TransFAIR study: a European multicentre experimental comparison of EHR2EDC technology to the usual manual method for eCRF data collection.

Nadir Ammour, Nicolas Griffon, Juliette Djadi-Prat, Gilles Chatellier, Martine Lewi, Marija Todorovic, Augustín Gómez de la Cámara, Maria Teresa García Morales, Sara Testoni, Oriana Nanni and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ health & care informatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

16 authors at 9 institutions in 6 countries.

Nadir AmmourClinical Innovation Office, Sanofi SA Recherche & Developpement, Paris, France nadir.ammour@sanofi.com.
Nicolas GriffonDSI-WIND, Assistance Publique - Hopitaux de Paris, Paris, France.
Juliette Djadi-PratUnité de Recherche Clinique, AP-HP, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4949-9474
Gilles ChatellierUnité de Recherche Clinique, Assistance Publique - Hopitaux de Paris, Paris, France.
Martine LewiJanssen Pharmaceutica NV, Beerse, Belgium.
Marija TodorovicJanssen Pharmaceutica NV, Beerse, Belgium.
Augustín Gómez de la CámaraInstituto de Investigacion, Hospital 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain.
Maria Teresa García MoralesInstituto de Investigacion, Hospital 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain.
Sara TestoniBiostatistics and Clinical Trials, IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori Dino Amadori, Meldola, Italy.
Oriana NanniBiostatistics and Clinical Trials, IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori Dino Amadori, Meldola, Italy.
Christoph SchindlerMedizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Germany.
Mats SundgrenData sciences AI, Biopharmaceuticals RD, AstraZeneca FoU Göteborg, Goteborg, Sweden.
Almenia GarveyICON plc, Dublin, Ireland.
Tomothy VictorICON plc, Dublin, Ireland.
Manon CariouClinical Innovation Office, Sanofi SA Recherche & Developpement, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3212-3446
Christel DanielDSI-WIND, Assistance Publique - Hopitaux de Paris, Paris, France.
Inserm · FRIstituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori · ITJanssen (Belgium) · BEResearch Institute Hospital 12 de Octubre · ESSanofi (France) · FRAssistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FRAstraZeneca (Sweden) · SEMedizinische Hochschule Hannover · DEUniversité Paris Cité · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRegulatory authorities including the Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency are encouraging to conduct clinical trials using routinely collected data. The aim of the TransFAIR experimental comparison was to evaluate, within real-life conditions, the ability of the Electronic Health Records to Electronic Data Capture (EHR2EDC) module to accurately transfer from EHRs to EDC systems patients' data of clinical studies in various therapeutic areas.

methodsA prospective study including six clinical trials from three different sponsors running in three hospitals across Europe has been conducted. The same data from the six studies were collected using both traditional manual data entry and the EHR2EDC module. The outcome variable was the percentage of data accurately transferred using the EHR2EDC technology. This percentage was calculated considering all collected data and the data in four domains: demographics (DM), vital signs (VS), laboratories (LB) and concomitant medications (CM).

resultsOverall, 6143 data points (39.6% of the data in the scope of the TransFAIR study and 16.9% when considering all data) were accurately transferred using the platform. LB data represented 65.4% of the data transferred; VS data, 30.8%; DM data, 0.7% and CM data, 3.1%.

conclusionsThe objective of accurately transferring at least 15% of the manually entered trial datapoints using the EHR2EDC module was achieved. Collaboration and codesign by hospitals, industry, technology company, supported by the Institute of Innovation through Health Data was a success factor in accomplishing these results. Further work should focus on the harmonisation of data standards and improved interoperability to extend the scope of transferable EHR data.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsTechnologyData CollectionEuropeHumansProspective StudiesUnited StatesData ManagementElectronic Health RecordsHealth Information InteroperabilityMedical Informatics

Identifiers

PMID37316249
PMCPMC10277109
OpenAlexW4380730737

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.