Use cases of registry-based randomized controlled trials-A review of the registries' contributions and constraints.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Nadine Kubesch, Sneha Gaitonde, Uarda Petriti, Elisabeth Bakker, Swati Basu, Laura Ellen Birks, Elodie Aubrun, Sieta T de Vries, Rahel Schneider
{"title":"Use cases of registry-based randomized controlled trials-A review of the registries' contributions and constraints.","authors":"Nadine Kubesch, Sneha Gaitonde, Uarda Petriti, Elisabeth Bakker, Swati Basu, Laura Ellen Birks, Elodie Aubrun, Sieta T de Vries, Rahel Schneider","doi":"10.1111/cts.70072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Registry-based randomized controlled trials (RRCTs) can combine the advantages of registries with those of randomization. This review aimed to expand the current knowledge on RRCT utilization and implementation by providing a comprehensive overview of RRCT use cases. A targeted literature search was conducted through July 2023 to identify articles on RRCTs. Information regarding the RRCT characteristics, their utilization, and the registries' contributions and the constraints faced was extracted. Descriptive statistics were used. We identified 102 RRCTs in 110 publications. RRCTs were mostly performed for the assessment of medical devices or surgical/clinical procedures (n = 45), followed by drugs (n = 30). More than half of the RRCTs were conducted in the Nordic countries (n = 58) and the most used registry types were health service registries/administrative health data (n = 63), followed by disease registries (n = 46). Approximately half of the RRCTs (n = 53) utilized additional data sources aside from registry data. The contribution of a registry to the RRCT was mostly for data collection and study follow-up (n = 90-92), followed by patient recruitment (n = 56-61), and randomization (n = 28-38), with varying levels of transparency in reporting. We collated author-reported constraints related to the used registries into four overarching themes, that is, data availability and completeness, data quality, representativeness, and registry infrastructure and accessibility. This review shows that RRCTs are already used in different domains and geographic regions. Guidelines on structured and transparent reporting of RRCT methods and the optimal use are, however, needed to inform decision-making by health authorities and to reach their full potential.</p>","PeriodicalId":50610,"journal":{"name":"Cts-Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"17 11","pages":"e70072"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cts-Clinical and Translational Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cts.70072","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Registry-based randomized controlled trials (RRCTs) can combine the advantages of registries with those of randomization. This review aimed to expand the current knowledge on RRCT utilization and implementation by providing a comprehensive overview of RRCT use cases. A targeted literature search was conducted through July 2023 to identify articles on RRCTs. Information regarding the RRCT characteristics, their utilization, and the registries' contributions and the constraints faced was extracted. Descriptive statistics were used. We identified 102 RRCTs in 110 publications. RRCTs were mostly performed for the assessment of medical devices or surgical/clinical procedures (n = 45), followed by drugs (n = 30). More than half of the RRCTs were conducted in the Nordic countries (n = 58) and the most used registry types were health service registries/administrative health data (n = 63), followed by disease registries (n = 46). Approximately half of the RRCTs (n = 53) utilized additional data sources aside from registry data. The contribution of a registry to the RRCT was mostly for data collection and study follow-up (n = 90-92), followed by patient recruitment (n = 56-61), and randomization (n = 28-38), with varying levels of transparency in reporting. We collated author-reported constraints related to the used registries into four overarching themes, that is, data availability and completeness, data quality, representativeness, and registry infrastructure and accessibility. This review shows that RRCTs are already used in different domains and geographic regions. Guidelines on structured and transparent reporting of RRCT methods and the optimal use are, however, needed to inform decision-making by health authorities and to reach their full potential.

基于登记册的随机对照试验用例--对登记册的贡献和制约因素的审查。
基于登记处的随机对照试验(RRCT)可以将登记处的优势与随机化的优势结合起来。本综述旨在通过全面概述RRCT的使用案例,扩展目前有关RRCT使用和实施的知识。我们在 2023 年 7 月之前进行了一次有针对性的文献检索,以确定有关 RRCT 的文章。提取了有关 RRCT 特征、其利用情况、登记处的贡献以及所面临的制约因素的信息。我们使用了描述性统计方法。我们在 110 篇出版物中发现了 102 项 RRCT。RRCT大多用于评估医疗器械或手术/临床程序(n = 45),其次是药物(n = 30)。一半以上的 RRCT 在北欧国家进行(n = 58),使用最多的登记类型是医疗服务登记/行政健康数据(n = 63),其次是疾病登记(n = 46)。大约一半的 RRCT(n = 53)利用了登记册数据以外的其他数据源。登记处对 RRCT 的贡献主要是数据收集和研究随访(90-92 例),其次是患者招募(56-61 例)和随机化(28-38 例),报告的透明度各不相同。我们将作者报告的与所使用登记处相关的限制因素整理为四大主题,即数据可用性和完整性、数据质量、代表性以及登记处基础设施和可访问性。此次审查表明,RRCT 已在不同领域和地理区域得到应用。然而,需要制定有关 RRCT 方法的结构化和透明报告以及最佳使用的准则,以便为卫生当局的决策提供信息,并充分发挥其潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cts-Clinical and Translational Science
Cts-Clinical and Translational Science 医学-医学:研究与实验
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.60%
发文量
234
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical and Translational Science (CTS), an official journal of the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, highlights original translational medicine research that helps bridge laboratory discoveries with the diagnosis and treatment of human disease. Translational medicine is a multi-faceted discipline with a focus on translational therapeutics. In a broad sense, translational medicine bridges across the discovery, development, regulation, and utilization spectrum. Research may appear as Full Articles, Brief Reports, Commentaries, Phase Forwards (clinical trials), Reviews, or Tutorials. CTS also includes invited didactic content that covers the connections between clinical pharmacology and translational medicine. Best-in-class methodologies and best practices are also welcomed as Tutorials. These additional features provide context for research articles and facilitate understanding for a wide array of individuals interested in clinical and translational science. CTS welcomes high quality, scientifically sound, original manuscripts focused on clinical pharmacology and translational science, including animal, in vitro, in silico, and clinical studies supporting the breadth of drug discovery, development, regulation and clinical use of both traditional drugs and innovative modalities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信