ArticleStudies in health technology and informatics2025
A Customizable Data Quality Tool for Global Observational Research Networks.
Article in Studies in health technology and informatics, 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.
- Sex Differences in Advanced HIV Disease at Presentation in Care Among People Living With HIV in Latin America and the Caribbean.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Evaluating data quality is essential when combining multi-site observational clinical data for analysis. We collaborated with five research networks, representing various data approaches and workflows, to generalize an established data quality checking and report generation tool so it could be implemented more easily by other research consortia. The resulting approach reduced the need for technical expertise at user sites by leveraging the REDCap data collection software to store details about a research group, their data model, and expectations about variables (e.g., plausible numeric range, valid format and codes, date logic). The application then used the REDCap API to retrieve those details and assess a dataset's conformance to the data model, logical consistency, and completeness. Users could download reports that summarized the dataset contents and quality. The generalized Harmonist Data Toolkit was built using the freely available REDCap and R/Shiny platforms, with code available on GitHub. All five collaborating consortia found the Toolkit beneficial in detecting inconsistencies and providing informative data reports and visualizations. The Harmonist Data Toolkit fills a need for data quality and report generation solutions for consortia without local programming expertise.
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.