Literature DB >> 2767111

Quality control of validity of data collected in clinical trials. EORTC Study Group on Data Management (SGDM).

K Vantongelen1, N Rotmensz, E van der Schueren.   

Abstract

In a study initiated by the EORTC Study Group on Data Management, 15 site visits to main participating centers in ongoing cancer clinical trials have been carried out over a 1 year period. The aim was to evaluate the quality level of EORTC clinical trial data, to find out the order of magnitude of possible problems encountered and to test a technique to objectively assess the quality of data. The process of data collection and the quality of data transfer from hospital charts to EORTC case report forms (CRF) were checked. The data quality was scored and the causes of incorrectness were evaluated. Percentages of correct data ranged from 78% up to 98%; 11/15 centers had greater than 90% correct data. The median rate of error encountered in key data was 2.8% (range 0.5-7%). The main source of error was incorrect transfer of the information recorded in the patient chart to the CRF. Equally good overall results have been observed in the centers where data managers fill in the forms (DM) and those centers without an administrative trial structure (PH). The mean percentage of correct data for both types of centers is 91.4%. The wider range in percentage for incorrect data (DM mean value 3.0%, range 0.5-7%; PH mean value 2.3%, range 1.4-3.1) suggests the important impact of the knowledge and experience of the people involved in data management. The data quality evaluation was hampered by the impossibility of checking part of the data present on the CRF, 0.4-14.5%. Besides knowledge and experience, the main aspects influencing good data quality appeared to be the efficacy of the internal organization and good local data monitoring. The importance of the design of CRFs was also highlighted. As this study was run for on-going protocols, the site visiting team had the opportunity to point out and report to the trial coordinator all shortcomings and controversial points that could thus be corrected during the course of the trial.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2767111     DOI: 10.1016/0277-5379(89)90421-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0277-5379


  13 in total

Review 1.  Defining and improving data quality in medical registries: a literature review, case study, and generic framework.

Authors:  Danielle G T Arts; Nicolette F De Keizer; Gert-Jan Scheffer
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 2.  Accuracy of data in computer-based patient records.

Authors:  W R Hogan; M M Wagner
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  1997 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  Impact of a targeted monitoring on data-quality and data-management workload of randomized controlled trials: A prospective comparative study.

Authors:  Claire Fougerou-Leurent; Bruno Laviolle; Christelle Tual; Valérie Visseiche; Aurélie Veislinger; Hélène Danjou; Amélie Martin; Valérie Turmel; Alain Renault; Eric Bellissant
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2019-12-14       Impact factor: 4.335

4.  Desiderata for a computer-assisted audit tool for clinical data source verification audits.

Authors:  Stephany N Duda; Firas H Wehbe; Cynthia S Gadd
Journal:  Stud Health Technol Inform       Date:  2010

5.  Quality assurance of the EORTC Trial 22881/10882: boost versus no boost in breast conserving therapy. An overview.

Authors:  G van Tienhoven; B J Mijnheer; H Bartelink; D G González
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 3.621

6.  Measuring the quality of observational study data in an international HIV research network.

Authors:  Stephany N Duda; Bryan E Shepherd; Cynthia S Gadd; Daniel R Masys; Catherine C McGowan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-04-06       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  High-dose epirubicin is not an alternative to standard-dose doxorubicin in the treatment of advanced soft tissue sarcomas. A study of the EORTC soft tissue and bone sarcoma group.

Authors:  O S Nielsen; P Dombernowsky; H Mouridsen; D Crowther; J Verweij; J Buesa; W Steward; S Daugaard; M van Glabbeke; A Kirkpatrick; T Tursz
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 8.  Oncology data management in the UK--BODMA's view. British Oncology Data Managers Association.

Authors:  D Riley; L Ward; T Young
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  The role of the clinical research coordinator--data manager--in oncology clinical trials.

Authors:  Fernando Rico-Villademoros; Teresa Hernando; Juan-Luis Sanz; Antonio López-Alonso; Oscar Salamanca; Carlos Camps; Rafael Rosell
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2004-03-25       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  Quantifying data quality for clinical trials using electronic data capture.

Authors:  Meredith L Nahm; Carl F Pieper; Maureen M Cunningham
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2008-08-25       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.