ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2025
Data accuracy in the European Cystic Fibrosis Society Patient Registry: results of an on-site data validation project.
Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 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.
- Multilingual Evidence-Based Question-Answering for Stroke Discharge Summaries: Study of Cross-Lingual Heterogeneity in Clinical Reports.Journal of medical Internet research · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient registries are valuable tools for epidemiological research, especially for rare diseases, and a high level of data quality is essential but not always demonstrated. Although crucial, the quality management process in patient registries rarely includes data validation. The European Cystic Fibrosis Society Patient Registry (ECFSPR) collects clinical data about people with cystic fibrosis (pwCF) in Europe (as defined by the World Health Organisation (WHO) European region). This on-site data validation project was conducted by the ECFSPR to assess feasibility of the project, data accuracy and identify areas for improvement.
methodsFrom November 2018 to April 2024 the ECFSPR visited centres to validate data on-site, assessing the accuracy and validity of source data for key variables related to demographics, diagnosis, organ transplant and annual disease progression. We compared data submitted to ECFSPR with medical health records (MHR) at participating centres; standardised variable definitions are used for the ECFSPR data. Accuracy (incl. validity) was expressed as the percentage of validated data points that match the MHR.
resultsWe validated source data on-site in 34 of 40 (85%) participating countries and 133 of 397 (34%) centres, for 4024 pwCF (7.5% of the ECFSPR 2021 dataset). Accuracy was high for demographic data (month and year of birth, sex), transplant (> 99%) and annual clinical data on disease progression (selected infections, medication, complications; >94%). Accuracy for genetic information was 96.6% (where the original genotyping laboratory report was available which was for 85% of all pwCF). Anthropometric measurements and lung function data showed lower accuracy (87-88% of the validated data; this was primarily due to non-adherence to the parameters for selection of the encounter for annual lung function assessment. Data for liver disease were also comparatively less accurate (92%); this may reflect diagnostic heterogeneity.
conclusionsThe ECFSPR on-site data validation project demonstrated its feasibility and confirmed the high accuracy of data for critical variables while also revealing specific areas for targeted quality improvement efforts. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.