Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39879093›Full record

Observational studyJMIR formative research2025

Technological Adjuncts to Streamline Patient Recruitment, Informed Consent, and Data Management Processes in Clinical Research: Observational Study.

Jodie Koh, Stacey Caron, Amber N Watters, Mahesh Vaidyanathan, David Melnick, Alyssa Santi, Kenneth Hudson, Catherine Arguelles, Priyanka Mathur, Mozziyar Etemadi

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Jodie KohKellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, United States.ORCID 0009-0004-5339-8945
Stacey Caron *Northwestern Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0009-0002-5133-5188
Amber N Watters *Northwestern Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0009-0008-5933-2188
Mahesh Vaidyanathan *Northwestern Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4311-8896
David Melnick *Northwestern Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1535-697X
Alyssa Santi *Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0009-0005-7321-1807
Kenneth Hudson *Northwestern Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0009-0001-6774-0551
Catherine Arguelles *Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0009-0000-1978-1255
Priyanka Mathur *Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9040-9835
Mozziyar Etemadi *Northwestern Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6324-9220

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient recruitment and data management are laborious, resource-intensive aspects of clinical research that often dictate whether the successful completion of studies is possible. Technological advances present opportunities for streamlining these processes, thus improving completion rates for clinical research studies.

objectiveThis paper aims to demonstrate how technological adjuncts can enhance clinical research processes via automation and digital integration.

methodsUsing one clinical research study as an example, we highlighted the use of technological adjuncts to automate and streamline research processes across various digital platforms, including a centralized database of electronic medical records (enterprise data warehouse [EDW]); a clinical research data management tool (REDCap [Research Electronic Data Capture]); and a locally managed, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant server. Eligible participants were identified through automated queries in the EDW, after which they received personalized email invitations with digital consent forms. After digital consent, patient data were transferred to a single Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant server where each participant was assigned a unique QR code to facilitate data collection and integration. After the research study visit, data obtained were associated with existing electronic medical record data for each participant via a QR code system that collated participant consent, imaging data, and associated clinical data according to a unique examination ID.

resultsOver a 19-month period, automated EDW queries identified 20,988 eligible patients, and 10,582 patients received personalized email invitations. In total, 1000 (9.45%) patients signed consents to participate in the study. Of the consented patients, 549 unique patients completed 779 study visits; some patients consented to the study at more than 1 time period during their pregnancy.

conclusionsTechnological adjuncts in clinical research decrease human labor while increasing participant reach and minimizing disruptions to clinic operations. Automating portions of the clinical research process benefits clinical research efforts by expanding and optimizing participant reach while reducing the limitations of labor and time in completing research studies.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchData ManagementInformed ConsentPatient SelectionAdultElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHealth Insurance Portability and Accountability ActHumansMaleautomationclinical research methodsclinical research processesconsentdata managementdata warehousedigital healthdigital platformsimaging datapatient datapatient recruitmentpregnancytechnological adjuncts

Identifiers

PMID39879093
PMCPMC11822312

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.