Dataset Information

Compliance of clinical trial registries with the World Health Organization minimum data set: a survey.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Since September 2005 the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors has required that trials be registered in accordance with the World Health Organization (WHO) minimum dataset, in order to be considered for publication. The objective is to evaluate registries' and individual trial records' compliance with the 2006 version of the WHO minimum data set.

Methods

A retrospective evaluation of 21 online clinical trial registries (international, national, specialty, pharmaceutical industry and local) from April 2005 to February 2007 and a cross-sectional evaluation of a stratified random sample of 610 trial records from the 21 registries.

Results

Among 11 registries that provided guidelines for registration, the median compliance with the WHO criteria were 14 out of 20 items (range 6 to 20). In the period April 2005-February 2007, six registries increased their compliance by six data items, on average. None of the local registry websites published guidelines on the trial data items required for registration. Slightly more than half (330/610; 54.1%, 95% CI 50.1% - 58.1%) of trial records completed the contact details criteria while 29.7% (181/610, 95% CI 26.1% - 33.5%) completed the key clinical and methodological data fields.

Conclusion

While the launch of the WHO minimum data set seemed to positively influence registries with better standardisation of approaches, individual registry entries are largely incomplete. Initiatives to ensure quality assurance of registries and trial data should be encouraged. Peer reviewers and editors should scrutinise clinical trial registration records to ensure consistency with WHO's core content requirements when considering trial-related publications.

SUBMITTER: Moja LP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2734552 | biostudies-literature | 2009 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Compliance of clinical trial registries with the World Health Organization minimum data set: a survey.

Moja Lorenzo P LP Moschetti Ivan I Nurbhai Munira M Compagnoni Anna A Liberati Alessandro A Grimshaw Jeremy M JM Chan An-Wen AW Dickersin Kay K Krleza-Jeric Karmela K Moher David D Sim Ida I Volmink Jimmy J

Trials 20090722

<h4>Background</h4>Since September 2005 the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors has required that trials be registered in accordance with the World Health Organization (WHO) minimum dataset, in order to be considered for publication. The objective is to evaluate registries' and individual trial records' compliance with the 2006 version of the WHO minimum data set.<h4>Methods</h4>A retrospective evaluation of 21 online clinical trial registries (international, national, specialty, ...[more]

PMID: 19624821

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundResearch in 2007 showed that World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations were largely based on expert opinion, rarely used systematic evidence-based methods, and did not follow the organization's own "Guidelines for Guidelines". In response, the WHO established a "Guidelines Review Committee" (GRC) to implement and oversee internationally recognized standards. We examined the impact of these changes on WHO guideline documents and explored senior staff's perceptions of the new procedures.Methods and findingsWe used the AGREE II guideline appraisal tool to appraise ten GRC-approved guidelines from nine WHO departments, and ten pre-GRC guidelines matched by department and topic. We interviewed 20 senior staff across 16 departments and analyzed the transcripts using the framework approach. Average AGREE II scores for GRC-approved guidelines were higher across all six AGREE domains compared with pre-GRC guidelines. The biggest changes were noted for "Rigour of Development" (up 37.6%, from 30.7% to 68.3%) and "Editorial Independence" (up 52.7%, from 20.9% to 73.6%). Four main themes emerged from the interviews: (1) high standards were widely recognized as essential for WHO credibility, particularly with regard to conflicts of interest; (2) views were mixed on whether WHO needed a single quality assurance mechanism, with some departments purposefully bypassing the procedures; (3) staff expressed some uncertainties in applying the GRADE approach, with departmental staff concentrating on technicalities while the GRC remained concerned the underlying principles were not fully institutionalized; (4) the capacity to implement the new standards varied widely, with many departments looking to an overstretched GRC for technical support.ConclusionsSince 2007, WHO guideline development methods have become more systematic and transparent. However, some departments are bypassing the procedures, and as yet neither the GRC, nor the quality assurance standards they have set, are fully embedded within the organization.

Project description:BACKGROUND: over the last 25 years several national registries of CF have been set up. Such systems can be very useful in providing an integrated resource for improving patient care and conducting research on the disease. Minimum Data Set is a common set of data items that should be used to collect and report data in the registry. The principal aim of this research was to determine minimum data set for the CF registry in north-west of Iran. METHODS: data items collected by several selected registries of cystic fibrosis were studied and an initial set of data was selected by the researchers. A group of experts including epidemiologists, pediatricians, and CF specialists were asked to review the proposed data elements and score them based on their importance by using a nine-point Likert scale. The items scored as important or highly important by more than 50 % of the experts, were included in final list of minimum data set. Availability of data was evaluated through reviewing medical records of 144 patients hospitalized in Children Hospital located in Tabriz. RESULTS: overall six classes of data (46 items) were identified in the selected registry systems for cystic fibrosis: patient demographics, administrative data, survival status, diagnostic procedures, genetic and clinical manifestations, and therapeutics. Thirty two data elements from all six categories of data were approved by the experts as the minimum data set for cystic fibrosis registry system. Availability of data in administrative category and survival class was 100 percent. Collecting data on medications was feasible in 100% of the cases as well. In class of demographic data, accessibility of patient name, age, gender, place of birth, and date of birth was 100 percent. In group of diagnostic procedures, partial availability of data was found for sweat test and genetic test. No data was found on the antenatal screening, exercise tolerance test, and glucose tolerance test. CONCLUSION: this work can be considered as a first step toward establishing CF registry system in Iran. Minimum data set can be also useful in designing electronic registry or electronic patient records for those suffering from CF toward integration of their fragmented records across continuum of the health care system in order to improve quality of shared patient care.

Project description:BackgroundThe Resident Assessment Instrument-Minimum Data Set (RAI-MDS) 2.0 is designed to collect the minimum amount of data to guide care planning and monitoring for residents in long-term care settings. These data have been used to compute indicators of care quality. Use of the quality indicators to inform quality improvement initiatives is contingent upon the validity and reliability of the indicators. The purpose of this review was to systematically examine published and grey research reports in order to assess the state of the science regarding the validity and reliability of the RAI-MDS 2.0 Quality Indicators (QIs).MethodsWe systematically reviewed the evidence for the validity and reliability of the RAI-MDS 2.0 QIs. A comprehensive literature search identified relevant original research published, in English, prior to December 2008. Fourteen articles and one report examining the validity and/or reliability of the RAI-MDS 2.0 QIs were included.ResultsThe studies fell into two broad categories, those that examined individual quality indicators and those that examined multiple indicators. All studies were conducted in the United States and included from one to a total of 209 facilities. The number of residents included in the studies ranged from 109 to 5758. One study conducted under research conditions examined 38 chronic care QIs, of which strong evidence for the validity of 12 of the QIs was found. In response to these findings, the 12 QIs were recommended for public reporting purposes. However, a number of observational studies (n = 13), conducted in "real world" conditions, have tested the validity and/or reliability of individual QIs, with mixed results. Ten QIs have been studied in this manner, including falls, depression, depression without treatment, urinary incontinence, urinary tract infections, weight loss, bedfast, restraint, pressure ulcer, and pain. These studies have revealed the potential for systematic bias in reporting, with under-reporting of some indicators and over-reporting of others.ConclusionEvidence for the reliability and validity of the RAI-MDS QIs remains inconclusive. The QIs provide a useful tool for quality monitoring and to inform quality improvement programs and initiatives. However, caution should be exercised when interpreting the QI results and other sources of evidence of the quality of care processes should be considered in conjunction with QI results.

Dataset Information

Compliance of clinical trial registries with the World Health Organization minimum data set: a survey.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Compliance of clinical trial registries with the World Health Organization minimum data set: a survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets