Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40677594›Full record

ArticleLearning health systems2025

Moving from a registry to a learning health system: A case study of a Dutch prostate cancer registry.

Tom Belleman, Jeroen D H van Wijngaarden, Malou C P Kuppen, Saskia de Groot, Kim J M van der Velden, Dianne Bosch, Inge M van Oort, Carin A Uyl-de Groot, Welmoed K van Deen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Learning health systems, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Tom BellemanErasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Section Health Technology Assessment Erasmus University Rotterdam Rotterdam the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9086-6558
Jeroen D H van WijngaardenErasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Health Services Management and Organisation Erasmus University Rotterdam Rotterdam the Netherlands.
Malou C P KuppenDepartment of Radiation Oncology (Maastro), GROW Research Institute for Oncology and Reproduction Maastricht University Medical Centre+ Maastricht The Netherlands.
Saskia de GrootErasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Section Health Technology Assessment Erasmus University Rotterdam Rotterdam the Netherlands.
Kim J M van der VeldenDepartment of Urology Radboud University Medical Center Nijmegen the Netherlands.
Dianne BoschDepartment of Urology Radboud University Medical Center Nijmegen the Netherlands.
Inge M van OortDepartment of Urology Radboud University Medical Center Nijmegen the Netherlands.
Carin A Uyl-de GrootErasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Section Health Technology Assessment Erasmus University Rotterdam Rotterdam the Netherlands.
Welmoed K van DeenErasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Section Health Technology Assessment Erasmus University Rotterdam Rotterdam the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Learning health systems (LHSs) are systems that seamlessly embed continuous quality improvement based on real-world data. To establish LHSs, several infrastructures need to be in place. Registries already have part(s) of this infrastructure and could therefore be leveraged to establish LHSs. This study aims to identify key factors facilitating the transition of registries into LHS to support continuous learning from real-world data. Methods: Eleven interviews with 12 stakeholders, including medical specialists and nonmedical stakeholders, were conducted in the context of a prostate cancer registry. Findings were coded deductively based on seven previously identified facilitators for learning: complexity, relative advantage, compatibility, credibility, social impact, actionability, and resource match. These facilitators cover technical, social, and organizational aspects. An inductive phase followed to pinpoint factors for continuous learning and LHSs. Subsequently, two focus groups were conducted to ensure accurate interpretation of findings, and five expert panels to provide additional context. Results: Complexity within healthcare systems emerged as a significant challenge, attributed to multiple stakeholders and the rapidly changing healthcare landscape. The advantage of LHSs is the timely availability of population-based data for real-time care adjustments. Compatibility of the system with stakeholders' needs was considered pivotal requiring a relatively flexible infrastructure. Credibility of data and results was supported by creating transparent processes in which stakeholders could review data from their own patient population. Social influences, including interpersonal trust and engaged leadership, fostered collaboration within LHSs. Actionability of the findings and resource match were vital for knowledge translation and sustainability. Conclusion: Our findings provide practical recommendations to support registries in transitioning towards LHSs by leveraging and expanding their infrastructure for continuous learning. We identified technical, interpersonal, and organizational factors that facilitate continuous and rapid learning using real-world data, create transparent and collaborative infrastructures, and help to navigate the complexity of the healthcare system.

Indexed as

continuous learninglearning health systemprostate cancerregistry

Identifiers

PMID40677594
PMCPMC12264377

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.