Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38287383›Full record

ArticleTrials2024

The use of healthcare systems data for RCTs.

Alice-Maria Toader, Carrol L Gamble, Susanna Dodd, Paula R Williamson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Alice-Maria ToaderMRC-NIHR Trials Methodology Research Partnership, Department of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. Sgatoade@liverpool.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3801-3486
Carrol L GambleLiverpool Clinical Trials Centre, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3021-1955
Susanna DoddMRC-NIHR Trials Methodology Research Partnership, Department of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2851-3337
Paula R WilliamsonMRC-NIHR Trials Methodology Research Partnership, Department of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9802-6636

Funding

MRC Trials Methodology Research Partnership (TMRP) Doctoral Training Partnership (DTP) MR/W006049/1.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealthcare systems data (HSD) has the potential to optimise the efficiency of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), by decreasing trial-specific data demands. Therefore, the use of HSD in trials is expected to increase. In 2019, it was estimated that 47% of NIHR-funded trials were planning to use HSD. We aim to understand the extent and nature of its current use and its evolution over time.

methodsWe identified a cohort of RCTs within the NIHR Journals Library that commenced after 2019 and were described as being in progress on 6 June 2022. Details on the source and use of HSD were extracted from eligible RCTs. The use of HSD was categorised according to whether it was used as the sole data source for outcomes and whether the outcomes were primary or secondary. HSD is often insufficient for patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We aimed to determine methods used by trialists for collecting PRO data alongside HSD.

resultsOf the 84 eligible studies, 52 (62%) planned to use HSD and 79 (94%) planned to collect PROs. The number of RCTs planning to use HSD for at least one outcome was 28 (54%) with 24 of these planning to use HSD as the sole data source for at least one outcome. The number of studies planning to use HSD for primary and secondary outcomes was 10 (20%) and 21 (40%) respectively. The sources of HSD were National Health Service (NHS) Digital (n = 37, 79%), patient registries (n = 7, 29%), primary care (n = 5, 21%), The Office for National Statistics (ONS) (n = 3, 13%) and other (n = 2, 8%). PROs were collected for 92% of the trials planning to use HSD. Methods for collection of PROs included in-person (n = 26, 54%), online (n = 22, 46%), postal (n = 18, 38%), phone (n = 14, 29%) and app (n = 2, 4%).

conclusionsHSD is being used in around two thirds of the studies but cannot yet be used to support PRO data collection within the cohort we examined. Comparison with an earlier cohort demonstrates an increase in the number of RCTs planning to use HSD.

Indexed as

Data CollectionDelivery of Health CareRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicHumansTelephoneClinical trialsData validityHealthcare systems dataOutcomesRegistriesRoutinely collected dataRoutinely collected health data

Identifiers

PMID38287383
PMCPMC10826061

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.