ArticleBMC medical research methodology2025
Managing withdrawals and exclusions of study participants in COVID-19-research by NUKLEUS.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 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
24 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis article describes how withdrawals and exclusions of study participants can be managed in COVID-19-cohort studies by NUKLEUS (German: NUM Klinische Epidemiologie- und Studienplattform), using NAPKON (German: Nationales Pandemie Kohorten Netz). The aim of this manuscript was to describe, how partial withdrawals can be performed so that most of the data and bio-samples can be kept for research purposes.
methodsThe study has taken all signed informed consents (ICs) of study participants into account in order to develop a method how partial withdrawals can be developed and installed. The informed consents, which comprise of mandatory and optional modules were investigated to find out which optional modules can be withdrawn from without withdrawing consent from the whole study.
resultsWithdrawals refer to signed ICs including mandatory and optional modules. Withdrawals can be submitted verbally or in writing, and regarding the IC, as a whole, or only partially. Consequently, implemented withdrawals for NAPKON cohorts comprise partial withdrawals with partial or no data deletion or complete withdrawals with data deletion. Thus, more data is still available for research purpose, which would have been lost without the possibility of partial withdrawals. In NAPKON, a total of 3,97% of the participants have submitted a withdrawal or have been excluded from the study if the inclusion criteria were no longer met.
conclusionsThis manuscript is to the author's knowledge one of the first article related to withdrawals within COVID-19-studies (NAPKON). The processes serve as 'best practice' examples for planning and establishing withdrawal processes in medical research.
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.