Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40921624›Full record

ArticlePharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2025

The Guardian Research Network: A Real-World Data Source for Pharmacoepidemiologic Research and Regulatory Applications.

Andrea McCracken, Julien Heidt, Elizabeth Eldridge, Charlie Hurmiz, Nicole Duran, Adam Reich, Efe Eworuke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors.

Andrea McCrackenGuardian Research Network, Spartanburg, South Carolina, USA.
Julien HeidtIQVIA, Real World Solutions, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4167-7961
Elizabeth EldridgeIQVIA, Real World Solutions, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Charlie HurmizGuardian Research Network, Spartanburg, South Carolina, USA.
Nicole DuranIQVIA, Real World Solutions, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Adam ReichIQVIA, Real World Solutions, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Efe EworukeIQVIA, Real World Solutions, Durham, North Carolina, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe quality of real-world data (RWD) directly impacts the value of real-world evidence (RWE) generated for regulatory decision-making. Data owners and investigators must be prepared to provide documentation on data quality assessments to regulators when submitting secondary data for regulatory purposes. While robust feasibility is required to justify the relevance of a data source for a specific research question, the reliability of the data, including the chain of custody and data journey prior to reaching the end user, is of equal importance for drawing valid, meaningful conclusions.

aimsRecently, Castellanos et al. constructed a definition of RWD quality by synthesizing definitions across published guidelines to characterize quality attributes of Flatiron Health RWD. In this paper, the transparent reporting of how data quality attributes (as defined by Castellanos et al.) are met in a single RWD source is replicated for the Guardian Research Network (GRN), a database of aggregated electronic health records (EHRs) collected from a geographically representative consortium of regional community health systems with experienced cancer research programs. MATERIALS &

methodsWe first describe GRN, including the data elements collected, timeliness of data availability, representativeness, and data access considerations. We then provide descriptions of how data reliability (accuracy, traceability, timeliness, completeness) and relevance (availability, sufficiency, representativeness) are ensured and assessed in GRN, including illustrative examples of relevant data quality checks.

resultsDescriptions of GRN's data quality processes demonstrate structured approaches to ensuring both reliability and relevance, aligned with published guidelines. Illustrative examples highlight the application of specific quality checks and their outcomes for GRN data. DISCUSSION: These findings illustrate the importance of documenting and communicating data quality attributes for RWD sources intended for regulatory use. Structured, transparent reporting can support more informed feasibility assessments and facilitate regulator confidence in RWE generation.

conclusionContinued development of structured approaches to identifying data fit for regulatory use underscores the need for comprehensive information about putative data sources during feasibility to inform decision making, study design, and elicit transparent conversations with regulators.

Indexed as

Data AccuracyPharmacoepidemiologyDatabases, FactualData CollectionHumansInformation SourcesReproducibility of ResultsResearch Designdata quality assessmentdata relevancedata reliabilityreal‐world datareal‐world evidenceregulatory decision‐making

Identifiers

PMID40921624
PMCPMC12417101

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.