ArticleMethodsX2023
The impact of data quality monitoring of a multicenter prospective registry of cardiac implantable electronic devices.
Article in MethodsX, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Data quality monitoring plays a crucial role in multicenter prospective registries. By maintaining high data accuracy, completeness, and consistency, researchers can improve the overall quality and reliability of the registry data, enabling meaningful conclusions and supporting evidence-based decisions. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate data quality metrics (completeness, accuracy, and temporal plausibility) of a Multicenter Registry of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (CIEDs) and to perform a direct data audit of a random sample of records to assess the agreement levels with the source documents. The CIED Registry was a prospective, multicenter, real-world observational study carried out from January 2020 to December 2022 in five designated centers across Sao Paulo, Brazil. We assessed the data quality of the CIED Registry by using two distinct approaches:•Dynamic data monitoring using features of the REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) software, including data reports and data quality rules•Direct data audit in which information from a random sample of 10 % of cases from the coordinating center was compared with original source documents Our findings suggest that the methodological approach applied to the CIED Registry resulted in high data completeness, accuracy, temporal plausibility, and excellent agreement levels with the source documents.
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.