ArticleInteractive journal of medical research2025
How to Design Electronic Case Report Form (eCRF) Questions to Maximize Semantic Interoperability in Clinical Research.
Article in Interactive journal of medical research, 2025. 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.
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unlabelled: Case report forms (CRFs) are the instruments used by research organizations worldwide to collect information about patients and study participants with the purpose of answering specific questions, assessing the efficacy and safety of medical products, and in general improving prevention and treatment in health care. To obtain significant research results out of the collected data, CRFs should be designed following the recommendations issued by regulatory authorities. However, we believe that semantic interoperability in CRFs has not yet been properly addressed. Within an international consortium comprising several COVID-19 cohorts, we scrutinized the questions included in the different CRFs with the purpose of establishing semantic interoperability across the different study data elements so that data could be merged and jointly analyzed. We realized that similar concepts were structured very differently across the different CRFs, making it hard to find and match the information. Based on the experience acquired, we developed 5 guiding principles on how to design CRFs to support semantic interoperability and increase data quality while also facilitating the sharing of data. Our aim in this viewpoint is to provide general suggestions that, in our opinion, should support researchers in designing CRFs. We conclude by urging authorities to establish an international coordination board for standards and interoperable clinical study data with competence in clinical data, interoperability standards, and data protection as part of a preparedness plan for future pandemics or other health threats.
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.