ArticleDrug safety2025
Stakeholders' Perspectives Toward the Use of Patient Registry Data for Decision-Making on Medicines: A Cross-Sectional Survey.
Article in Drug safety, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toward the Use of Real-World Data for Regulatory and HTA Decision-Making: Experiences and Recommendations from Six EU-Funded Projects.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Review
- Repurposing Registries: Completeness of Real-World Data for Regulatory and HTA Purposes in Three Cancer-Focused Registries.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Contribution of Real-World Evidence for the Orphan Medicines Approvals in the European Union Between 2000 and 2025.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Article
- A Cross-Sectional Survey of Evidence Needs for Medicinal Products in Europe With a Focus on Real-World Evidence.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2026Article
- Key Stakeholders' Knowledge, Opinions, and Interests on Real-World Evidence in the Regulatory Process-Results of an EU-Wide Survey.Clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Managing costly new drugs to support equitable access: international collaboration and patient engagement to assess value, and managed entry agreements.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Real-World Data Included in Post-authorisation Measures: A Case Study of Approved Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products in the European Union between 2013 and 2024.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2025Article
- Optimizing Patient Registries for Regulatory Decision Making - Key Learnings From an HMA/EMA Multistakeholder Workshop.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Review
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
Abstract
backgroundThe use of patient registries in regulatory, health technology assessment (HTA), and payer decision-making has gained increasing attention in recent years. Stakeholders' perspectives toward the use of registry-based real-world evidence (RWE) are unknown.
objectivesThe purpose of this study was to assess stakeholders' perspectives toward the use of RWE from patient registries in decision-making on medicines and explore factors influencing their intention to use registry data in the future.
methodsEuropean regulators, HTA/payers, and other stakeholders (industry, academia, healthcare professionals, patient representatives) were invited by email to participate in a web-based survey. The survey was open between November 2023 and January 2024 and contained 24 questions including demographics and questions about perspectives toward registry-based data for decision-making purposes. The latter consisted of 5-point Likert scale items based on the theory of planned behavior (TPB), i.e., attitudes, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control, and intention. Descriptive analyses and a logistic regression analysis (outcome: intention; determinants: demographics, attitudes, subjective norm, behavioral control) were performed.
resultsIncluded were 191 respondents (response rate: 16%), of whom 110 were regulators (58%), 24 HTA/payers (13%), and 54 other stakeholders (28%). Most respondents were between 41 and 50 years old (32%), 65% were women, and 53% had > 10 years work experience. Respondents considered registry data in the medicinal product lifecycle most informative for characterization of disease epidemiology (mean 4.4; 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.2-4.5), and least informative for comparative effectiveness (mean 3.6; 95% CI 3.4-3.7). Reaching the relevant patient population was perceived as the biggest strength (mean 3.6; 95% CI 3.4-3.8), and data quality as the largest weakness of patient registries (mean 2.4; 95% CI 2.2-2.6). Compared with regulators, HTA/payers had a similar intention to use registry data (Odds ratio (OR) 1.56; 95% CI 0.47-5.16), while other stakeholders were more frequently very open (intention) to using registry data in the future (OR 8.48; 95% CI 3.00-23.98). Respondents from organizations in Northern Europe were less often very open to using registry data in the future than respondents from multinational organizations (OR 0.19; 95% CI 0.04-0.85). Finally, respondents with a high perceived behavioral control concerning the use of registry data were more often very open to using registry data in the future than respondents with a neutral or low perceived behavioral control (OR 3.45; 95% CI 1.37-8.64).
conclusionsThe participants in our survey were generally open to increasing the use of registry data in the future. Nevertheless, perceived weaknesses such as data quality and accessibility will need to be addressed to align and improve stakeholders' perspectives on the use of patient registries as an evidence basis for medicines decision-making.
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.