Using systematic data categorisation to quantify the types of data collected in clinical trials: the DataCat project.
Journal
Trials
ISSN: 1745-6215
Titre abrégé: Trials
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101263253
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 Jun 2020
16 Jun 2020
Historique:
received:
10
12
2019
accepted:
06
05
2020
entrez:
18
6
2020
pubmed:
18
6
2020
medline:
12
3
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Data collection consumes a large proportion of clinical trial resources. Each data item requires time and effort for collection, processing and quality control procedures. In general, more data equals a heavier burden for trial staff and participants. It is also likely to increase costs. Knowing the types of data being collected, and in what proportion, will be helpful to ensure that limited trial resources and participant goodwill are used wisely. The aim of this study is to categorise the types of data collected across a broad range of trials and assess what proportion of collected data each category represents. We developed a standard operating procedure to categorise data into primary outcome, secondary outcome and 15 other categories. We categorised all variables collected on trial data collection forms from 18, mainly publicly funded, randomised superiority trials, including trials of an investigational medicinal product and complex interventions. Categorisation was done independently in pairs: one person having in-depth knowledge of the trial, the other independent of the trial. Disagreement was resolved through reference to the trial protocol and discussion, with the project team being consulted if necessary. Primary outcome data accounted for 5.0% (median)/11.2% (mean) of all data items collected. Secondary outcomes accounted for 39.9% (median)/42.5% (mean) of all data items. Non-outcome data such as participant identifiers and demographic data represented 32.4% (median)/36.5% (mean) of all data items collected. A small proportion of the data collected in our sample of 18 trials was related to the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes accounted for eight times the volume of data as the primary outcome. A substantial amount of data collection is not related to trial outcomes. Trialists should work to make sure that the data they collect are only those essential to support the health and treatment decisions of those whom the trial is designed to inform.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Data collection consumes a large proportion of clinical trial resources. Each data item requires time and effort for collection, processing and quality control procedures. In general, more data equals a heavier burden for trial staff and participants. It is also likely to increase costs. Knowing the types of data being collected, and in what proportion, will be helpful to ensure that limited trial resources and participant goodwill are used wisely.
AIM
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study is to categorise the types of data collected across a broad range of trials and assess what proportion of collected data each category represents.
METHODS
METHODS
We developed a standard operating procedure to categorise data into primary outcome, secondary outcome and 15 other categories. We categorised all variables collected on trial data collection forms from 18, mainly publicly funded, randomised superiority trials, including trials of an investigational medicinal product and complex interventions. Categorisation was done independently in pairs: one person having in-depth knowledge of the trial, the other independent of the trial. Disagreement was resolved through reference to the trial protocol and discussion, with the project team being consulted if necessary.
KEY RESULTS
RESULTS
Primary outcome data accounted for 5.0% (median)/11.2% (mean) of all data items collected. Secondary outcomes accounted for 39.9% (median)/42.5% (mean) of all data items. Non-outcome data such as participant identifiers and demographic data represented 32.4% (median)/36.5% (mean) of all data items collected.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
A small proportion of the data collected in our sample of 18 trials was related to the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes accounted for eight times the volume of data as the primary outcome. A substantial amount of data collection is not related to trial outcomes. Trialists should work to make sure that the data they collect are only those essential to support the health and treatment decisions of those whom the trial is designed to inform.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32546192
doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04388-x
pii: 10.1186/s13063-020-04388-x
pmc: PMC7298750
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
535Subventions
Organisme : Chief Scientist Office
ID : HSRU1
Pays : United Kingdom
Références
Trials. 2019 Oct 15;20(1):593
pubmed: 31615577
Health Technol Assess. 2018 Jan;22(2):1-88
pubmed: 29318985
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2014 Oct;9(4):46-9
pubmed: 26125079
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2019 Dec;85(12):2784-2792
pubmed: 31471967
BMJ. 2010 Mar 23;340:c869
pubmed: 20332511
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2018 Jan;52(1):22-28
pubmed: 29714620
Korean J Anesthesiol. 2013 May;64(5):402-6
pubmed: 23741561
Clin Trials. 2013 Aug;10(4):624-32
pubmed: 23785066
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2009 May;67(5):487-93
pubmed: 19552742
Am J Ther. 2008 Sep-Oct;15(5):450-7
pubmed: 18806521
Trials. 2017 Feb 3;18(1):54
pubmed: 28159003
Am J Ther. 2015 Mar-Apr;22(2):117-24
pubmed: 23429165
Health Technol Assess. 2014 Mar;18(19):1-235, vii-viii
pubmed: 24679222
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014 May 12;11(5):5069-80
pubmed: 24823665
Lancet. 2014 Jan 11;383(9912):176-85
pubmed: 24411646
Trials. 2017 Mar 29;18(1):150
pubmed: 28356133
Trials. 2018 Jan 29;19(1):76
pubmed: 29378618
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2011 Mar;6(1):69-74
pubmed: 21460590