Opportunities and Challenges in High-Quality Contemporary Data Collection in Traumatic Brain Injury: The CENTER-TBI Experience.

Big data Data curation FAIR principles Large-scale observational study Review Traumatic brain injury

Journal

Neurocritical care
ISSN: 1556-0961
Titre abrégé: Neurocrit Care
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101156086

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
08 2022
Historique:
received: 03 12 2021
accepted: 11 02 2022
pubmed: 19 3 2022
medline: 4 8 2022
entrez: 18 3 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Strong evidence in support of guidelines for traumatic brain injury (TBI) is lacking. Large-scale observational studies may offer a complementary source of evidence to clinical trials to improve the care and outcome for patients with TBI. They are, however, challenging to execute. In this review, we aim to characterize opportunities and challenges of large-scale collaborative research in neurotrauma. We use the setup and conduct of Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in TBI (CENTER-TBI) as an illustrative example. We highlight the importance of building a team and of developing a network for younger researchers, thus investing toward the future. We involved investigators early in the design phase and recognized their efforts in a group contributor list on all publications. We found, however, that translation to academic credits often failed, and we suggest that the current system of academic credits be critically appraised. We found substantial variability in consent procedures for participant enrollment within and between countries. Overall, obtaining approvals typically required 4-6 months, with outliers up to 18 months. Research costs varied considerably across Europe and should be defined by center. We substantially underestimated costs of data curation, and we suggest that 15-20% of the budget be reserved for this purpose. Streamlining analyses and accommodating external research proposals demanded a structured approach. We implemented a systematic inventory of study plans and found this effective in maintaining oversight and in promoting collaboration between research groups. Ensuring good use of the data was a prominent feature in the review of external proposals. Multiple interactions occurred with industrial partners, mainly related to biomarkers and neuroimaging, and resulted in various formal collaborations, substantially extending the scope of CENTER-TBI. Overall, CENTER-TBI has been productive, with over 250 international peer-reviewed publications. We have ensured mechanisms to maintain the infrastructure and continued analyses. We see potential for individual patient data meta-analyses in connection to other large-scale projects. Our collaboration with Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in TBI (TRACK-TBI) has taught us that although standardized data collection and coding according to common data elements can facilitate such meta-analyses, further data harmonization is required for meaningful results. Both CENTER-TBI and TRACK-TBI have demonstrated the complexity of the conduct of large-scale collaborative studies that produce high-quality science and new insights.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35303262
doi: 10.1007/s12028-022-01471-w
pii: 10.1007/s12028-022-01471-w
doi:

Substances chimiques

Biomarkers 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Review Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

192-201

Informations de copyright

© 2022. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and Neurocritical Care Society.

Références

Maas AIR, Menon DK, Adelson PD, et al. Traumatic brain injury: integrated approaches to improve prevention, clinical care, and research. Lancet Neurol. 2017;16(12):987–1048. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30371-X .
doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30371-X pubmed: 29122524
Maas AI, Menon DK, Steyerberg EW, et al. Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI): a prospective longitudinal observational study. Neurosurgery. 2015;76(1):67–80.
doi: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000575
Steyerberg EW, Wiegers E, Sewalt C, et al. Case-mix, care pathways, and outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injury in CENTER-TBI: a European prospective, multicentre, longitudinal, cohort study. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18(10):923–34.
doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30232-7
Tosetti P, Hicks RR, Theriault E, et al. Toward an international initiative for traumatic brain injury research. J Neurotrauma. 2013;30(14):1211–22. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2013.2896 .
doi: 10.1089/neu.2013.2896 pubmed: 23731282 pmcid: 3713440
Timmers M, van Dijck JTJM, van Wijk RPJ, et al. How do 66 European institutional review boards approve one protocol for an international prospective observational study on traumatic brain injury? Experiences from the CENTER-TBI study. BMC Med Ethics. 2020;21(1):36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00480-8 .
doi: 10.1186/s12910-020-00480-8 pubmed: 32398066 pmcid: 7216427
van Wijk RPJ, van Dijck JTJM, Timmers M, van Veen E, Citerio G, Lingsma HF, Maas AIR, Menon DK, Peul WC, Stocchetti N, Kompanje EJO; CENTER-TBI investigators and participants. Informed consent procedures in patients with an acute inability to provide informed consent: Policy and practice in the CENTER-TBI study. J Crit Care. 2020;59:6–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2020.05.004
Shepherd V, Hood K, Sheehan M, Griffith R, Wood F. ‘It’s a tough decision’: a qualitative study of proxy decision-making for research involving adults who lack capacity to consent in UK. Age Ageing. 2019;48:903–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afz115 .
doi: 10.1093/ageing/afz115 pubmed: 31595291
Kunzmann K, Wernisch L, Richardson S, et al. Imputation of ordinal outcomes: a comparison of approaches in traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma. 2021;38(4):455–63.
doi: 10.1089/neu.2019.6858
Ercole A, Dixit A, Nelson DW, et al. Imputation strategies for missing baseline neurological assessment covariates after traumatic brain injury: A CENTER-TBI study. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(8):e0253425.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253425
Wilkinson MD, Dumontier M, Aalbersberg IJ, et al. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci Data. 2016;15(3): 160018. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18.Erratum.In:SciData.2019Mar19;6(1):6.PMID:26978244;PMCID:PMC4792175 .
doi: 10.1038/sdata.2016.18.Erratum.In:SciData.2019Mar19;6(1):6.PMID:26978244;PMCID:PMC4792175
Scheufele E, Aronzon D, Coopersmith R, et al. TranSMART: an open source knowledge management and high content data analytics platform. AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc. 2014;2014:96–101.
pubmed: 25717408 pmcid: 4333702
Doiron D, Marcon Y, Fortier I, Burton P, Ferretti V. Software Application Profile: Opal and Mica: open- source software solutions for epidemiological data management, harmonization and dissemination. Int J Epidemiol. 2017;46(5):1372–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyx180] .
doi: 10.1093/ije/dyx180] pubmed: 29025122 pmcid: 5837212
Ercole A, Brinck V, George P, et al. DAQCORD collaborators. Guidelines for Data acquisition, quality and curation for observational research designs (DAQCORD). J Clin Transl Sci. 2020;4(4):354–359. https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2020.24
Wilson L, Boase K, Nelson LD, Temkin NR, Giacino JT, Markowitz AJ, Maas A, Menon DK, Teasdale G, Manley GT. A Manual for the Glasgow outcome scale-extended interview. J Neurotrauma. 2021;38(17):2435–46. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2020.7527 .
doi: 10.1089/neu.2020.7527 pubmed: 33740873 pmcid: 8390784
Longo DL, Drazen JM. Data sharing. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(3):276–7. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMe1516564 .
doi: 10.1056/NEJMe1516564 pubmed: 26789876
Wilhelm EE, Oster E, Shoulson I. Approaches and costs for sharing clinical research data. JAMA 2014;311(12):1201
Fontanarosa P, Bauchner H, Flanagin A. Authorship and team science. JAMA. 2017;318(24):2433–7. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.19341 .
doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.19341 pubmed: 29279909

Auteurs

Andrew I R Maas (AIR)

Department of Neurosurgery, Antwerp University Hospital and University of Antwerp, Drie Eikenstraat 655, 2650, Edegem, Belgium. andrew.maas@uza.be.

Ari Ercole (A)

Division of Anaesthesia, University of Cambridge and Addenbrooke's Hospital, Box 93, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.

Veronique De Keyser (V)

Department of Neurosurgery, Antwerp University Hospital and University of Antwerp, Drie Eikenstraat 655, 2650, Edegem, Belgium.

David K Menon (DK)

Division of Anaesthesia, University of Cambridge and Addenbrooke's Hospital, Box 93, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.

Ewout W Steyerberg (EW)

Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH