ArticleReviews on recent clinical trials2025
From Paper to Digital: Evaluating Electronic Medical Records and their Compliance with EMA Guidelines in European Clinical Trials.
Article in Reviews on recent clinical trials, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOver the past decade, there has been a significant shift from paper-based to digital medical record management, driven largely by advances in digital technology. This transition has led to widespread adoption of Electronic Medical Records (EMRs), with the expectation that paper documentation will soon be fully replaced. In response, the European Medicines Agency's "Guideline on Computerised Systems in Clinical Trials" outlines essential criteria for validated EMR systems to ensure data integrity and security, and sets standards for electronic source documents in clinical trials.
methodsFrom December 2023 to March 2024, the Italian Group of Data Managers and Clinical Research Coordinators (GIDMcrc) conducted an online survey across clinical research sites in Italy, France and Belgium to assess the characteristics of medical records and source documents.
resultsThe survey was completed by 37 centres: 70.3% from Italy, 16.2% from France and 13.5% from Belgium. Most sites use a mixed paper/electronic Source Document (SD) system (72.3%), with fewer centres having fully electronic SD systems (13.5%) or fully paper-based systems (16.2%). EMR systems are used in 70.3% of sites, but only 23.8% comply with EMA guidelines for computerised systems. A country-specific analysis was also conducted to further explore the situations in Italy and France/Belgium.
conclusionDespite the widespread use of Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) in Italy, France and Belgium, Italy lags behind the other two countries in terms of digitization. Despite the presence of an EMR, many centres still use a mixed system of paper and electronic source documents. There is also a lack of awareness regarding EMA and GCP standards, particularly concerning training and system testing. The higher response rate from Italian centres highlights the need for a larger sample in France and Belgium, and a follow-up survey would be beneficial for assessing progress and refining corrective actions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39886795What 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.