Registry-based randomized controlled trials- what are the advantages, challenges, and areas for future research?

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 80, Issue , 2016, Pages 16-24

  Li, Guowei ^a,b   Sajobi, Tolulope T ^c,d,e   Menon, Bijoy K ^c,d,e   Korngut, Lawrence ^d,e   Lowerison, Mark ^c   James, Matthew ^c,f   Wilton, Stephen B ^d   Williamson, Tyler ^c   Gill, Stephanie ^d,e   Drogos, Lauren L ^d   Smith, Eric E ^d,e   Vohra, Sunita ^g   Hill, Michael D ^c,d,e   Thabane, Lehana ^a,b  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^f UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^g UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Clinical trial; Effectiveness; Pragmatic trial; Real world setting; Registry; Registry based randomized controlled trial

Indexed keywords

ACUTE HEART INFARCTION; BLOODSTREAM INFECTION; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CONGESTIVE HEART FAILURE; FOLLOW UP; FUTUROLOGY; HOSPITAL ADMISSION; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHICILLIN RESISTANT STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS INFECTION; METHODOLOGY; MORTALITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REGISTER; RESEARCH ETHICS; REVIEW; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; EPIDEMIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; TRENDS;

COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH; EPIDEMIOLOGIC RESEARCH DESIGN; HUMANS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; REGISTRIES;

EID: 85004008232     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.08.003     Document Type: Review

References (34)

1. [1] Canada Health Infoway. Registries, 2006. Available at https://www.infoway-inforoute.ca/en/solutions/electronic-health-records/registries. Accessed March 22, 2016.
2. [2] Arts, D.G., De Keizer, N.F., Scheffer, G.J., Defining and improving data quality in medical registries: a literature review, case study, and generic framework. J Am Med Inform Assoc 9 (2002), 600–611.
3. [3] Gliklich, R.E., Dreyer, N.A., Leavy, M.B., (eds.) Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User's Guide [Internet], 3rd ed., 2014, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), Rockville (MD) Data Sources for Registries. Available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK208611/ Accessed March 22, 2016.
4. [4] Gliklich, R.E., Dreyer, N.A., (eds.) Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User's Guide. (Prepared by Outcome DEcIDE Center [Outcome Sciences, Inc. dba Outcome] under Contract No. HHSA29020050035I TO1.) AHRQ Publication No. 07-EHC001-1, 2007, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD.
5. [5] Canadian Institute for Health Information. Types of care, 2014. Available at https://www.cihi.ca/en/types-of-care. Accessed March 25, 2016.
6. [6] Postmarketing studies and clinical trials—implementation of Section 505(o)(3) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, 2011, FDA Guidance for Industry, Silver Spring Available at http://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidancecomplianceregulatoryinformation/guidances/ucm172001.pdf Accessed March 22, 2016.
7. [7] Good pharmacovigilance practices and pharmacoepidemiologic assessment, 2005, FDA Guidance for Industry, Rockville Available at http://www.fda.gov/downloads/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM126834.pdf Accessed March 22, 2016.
8. [8] Frobert, O., Lagerqvist, B., Gudnason, T., Thuesen, L., Svensson, R., Olivecrona, G.K., et al. Thrombus Aspiration in ST-Elevation myocardial infarction in Scandinavia (TASTE trial). A multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled clinical registry trial based on the Swedish angiography and angioplasty registry (SCAAR) platform. Study design and rationale. Am Heart J 160 (2010), 1042–1048.
9. [9] Lauer, M.S., D'Agostino, R.B. Sr., The randomized registry trial—the next disruptive technology in clinical research?. N Engl J Med 369 (2013), 1579–1581.
10. [10] Ramsberg, J., Neovius, M., Register or electronic health records enriched randomized pragmatic trials: the future of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness trials?. Nordic J Health Econ, 2015 http://dx.doi.org/10.5617/njhe.1386.
11. [11] Thabane, L., Kaczorowski, J., Dolovich, L., Chambers, L.W., Mbuagbaw, L., Reducing the confusion and controversies around pragmatic trials: using the Cardiovascular Health Awareness Program (CHAP) trial as an illustrative example. Trials, 16, 2015, 387.
12. [12] Frobert, O., Lagerqvist, B., Olivecrona, G.K., Omerovic, E., Gudnason, T., Maeng, M., et al. Thrombus aspiration during ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 369 (2013), 1587–1597.
13. [13] James, S., Rao, S.V., Granger, C.B., Registry-based randomized clinical trials—a new clinical trial paradigm. Nat Rev Cardiol 12 (2015), 312–316.
14. [14] Lagerqvist, B., Frobert, O., Olivecrona, G.K., Gudnason, T., Maeng, M., Alstrom, P., et al. Outcomes 1 year after thrombus aspiration for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 371 (2014), 1111–1120.
15. [15] Jolly, S.S., Cairns, J.A., Yusuf, S., Meeks, B., Pogue, J., Rokoss, M.J., et al. Randomized trial of primary PCI with or without routine manual thrombectomy. N Engl J Med 372 (2015), 1389–1398.
16. [16] Kaczorowski, J., Chambers, L.W., Dolovich, L., Paterson, J.M., Karwalajtys, T., Gierman, T., et al. Improving cardiovascular health at population level: 39 community cluster randomised trial of Cardiovascular Health Awareness Program (CHAP). BMJ, 342, 2011, d442.
17. [17] Huang, S.S., Septimus, E., Kleinman, K., Moody, J., Hickok, J., Avery, T.R., et al. Targeted versus universal decolonization to prevent ICU infection. N Engl J Med 368 (2013), 2255–2265.
18. [18] Goeree, R., von Keyserlingk, C., Burke, N., He, J., Kaczorowski, J., Chambers, L., et al. Economic appraisal of a community-wide cardiovascular health awareness program. Value Health 16 (2013), 39–45.
19. [19] Eisenstein, E.L., Lemons, P.W. 2nd, Tardiff, B.E., Schulman, K.A., Jolly, M.K., Califf, R.M., Reducing the costs of phase III cardiovascular clinical trials. Am Heart J 149 (2005), 482–488.
20. [20] van Staa, T.P., Dyson, L., McCann, G., Padmanabhan, S., Belatri, R., Goldacre, B., et al. The opportunities and challenges of pragmatic point-of-care randomised trials using routinely collected electronic records: evaluations of two exemplar trials. Health Technol Assess 18 (2014), 1–146.
21. [21] Patsopoulos, N.A., A pragmatic view on pragmatic trials. Dialogues Clin Neurosci 13 (2011), 217–224.
22. [22] Furu, K., Wettermark, B., Andersen, M., Martikainen, J.E., Almarsdottir, A.B., Sørensen, H.T., The Nordic countries as a cohort for pharmacoepidemiological research. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol 106 (2010), 86–94.
23. [23] Unique Identification Authority of India, 2012. Available at https://uidai.gov.in/. Accessed June 15, 2016.
24. [24] Levine, M.N., Julian, J.A., Registries that show efficacy: good, but not good enough. J Clin Oncol 26 (2008), 5316–5319.
25. [25] Erlinge, D., Koul, S., Eriksson, P., Schersten, F., Omerovic, E., Linder, R., et al. Bivalirudin versus heparin in non-ST and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction-a registry-based randomized clinical trial in the SWEDEHEART registry (the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial). Am Heart J 175 (2016), 36–46.
26. [26] Gotberg, M., Christiansen, E.H., Gudmundsdottir, I., Sandhall, L., Omerovic, E., James, S.K., et al. Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve guided intervention (iFR-SWEDEHEART): rationale and design of a multicenter, prospective, registry-based randomized clinical trial. Am Heart J 170 (2015), 945–950.
27. [27] Tilson, H., Primatesta, P., Kim, D., Rauer, B., Hawkins, P.N., Hoffman, H.M., et al. Methodological challenges in monitoring new treatments for rare diseases: lessons from the cryopyrin-associated periodic syndrome registry. Orphanet J Rare Dis, 8, 2013, 139.
28. [28] Sackett, D.L., Clinician-trialist rounds: 16. Mind your explanatory and pragmatic attitudes!—part 1: what?. Clin Trials 10 (2013), 495–498.
29. [29] Zwarenstein, M., Treweek, S., Gagnier, J.J., Altman, D.G., Tunis, S., Haynes, B., et al. Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. BMJ, 337, 2008, a2390.
30. [30] Higgins JPT, Green S: Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 5.1.0. Available at http://handbook.cochrane.org. Updated 2011.
31. [31] Guyatt, G., Oxman, A.D., Akl, E.A., Kunz, R., Vist, G., Brozek, J., et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol 64 (2011), 383–394.
32. [32] Birtwhistle, R.V., Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network: a developing resource for family medicine and public health. Can Fam Physician 57 (2011), 1219–1220.
33. [33] Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network, 2014. Available at http://cpcssn.ca/. Accessed April 20, 2016.
34. [34] Birtwhistle, R., Williamson, T., Primary care electronic medical records: a new data source for research in Canada. CMAJ 187 (2015), 239–240.