ArticleJMIR formative research2024
Evaluation of Eligibility Criteria Relevance for the Purpose of IT-Supported Trial Recruitment: Descriptive Quantitative Analysis.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [The Medical Informatics Initiative at a glance-establishing a health research data infrastructure in Germany].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical trials (CTs) are crucial for medical research; however, they frequently fall short of the requisite number of participants who meet all eligibility criteria (EC). A clinical trial recruitment support system (CTRSS) is developed to help identify potential participants by performing a search on a specific data pool. The accuracy of the search results is directly related to the quality of the data used for comparison. Data accessibility can present challenges, making it crucial to identify the necessary data for a CTRSS to query. Prior research has examined the data elements frequently used in CT EC but has not evaluated which criteria are actually used to search for participants. Although all EC must be met to enroll a person in a CT, not all criteria have the same importance when searching for potential participants in an existing data pool, such as an electronic health record, because some of the criteria are only relevant at the time of enrollment.
objectiveIn this study, we investigated which groups of data elements are relevant in practice for finding suitable participants and whether there are typical elements that are not relevant and can therefore be omitted.
methodsWe asked trial experts and CTRSS developers to first categorize the EC of their CTs according to data element groups and then to classify them into 1 of 3 categories: necessary, complementary, and irrelevant. In addition, the experts assessed whether a criterion was documented (on paper or digitally) or whether it was information known only to the treating physicians or patients.
resultsWe reviewed 82 CTs with 1132 unique EC. Of these 1132 EC, 350 (30.9%) were considered necessary, 224 (19.8%) complementary, and 341 (30.1%) total irrelevant. To identify the most relevant data elements, we introduced the data element relevance index (DERI). This describes the percentage of studies in which the corresponding data element occurs and is also classified as necessary or supplementary. We found that the query of "diagnosis" was relevant for finding participants in 79 (96.3%) of the CTs. This group was followed by "date of birth/age" with a DERI of 85.4% (n=70) and "procedure" with a DERI of 35.4% (n=29).
conclusionsThe distribution of data element groups in CTs has been heterogeneously described in previous works. Therefore, we recommend identifying the percentage of CTs in which data element groups can be found as a more reliable way to determine the relevance of EC. Only necessary and complementary criteria should be included in this DERI.
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.