Implementation and results of an integrated data quality assurance protocol in a randomized controlled trial in Uttar Pradesh, India

Trials

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2017, Pages

  Gass, Jonathon D ^a   Misra, Anamika ^b   Yadav, Mahendra Nath Singh ^b   Sana, Fatima ^b   Singh, Chetna ^b   Mankar, Anup ^a   Neal, Brandon J ^a   Fisher Bowman, Jennifer ^a   Maisonneuve, Jenny ^a   Delaney, Megan Marx ^a   Kumar, Krishan ^b   Singh, Vinay Pratap ^b   Sharma, Narender ^b   Gawande, Atul ^a   Semrau, Katherine ^a   Hirschhorn, Lisa R ^c  

^a HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^b POPULATION SERVICES INTERNATIONAL   (United States)

^c NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Data accuracy; Data feedback; Data Quality Assurance (DQA); India; Maternal and perinatal mortality; Maternal morbidity; Patient reported outcomes; Randomized control trial (RCT); Safe Childbirth Checklist (SCC); Supportive supervision; Uttar Pradesh

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; HUMAN; INDIA; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTEGRATED DATA QUALITY ASSURANCE PROTOCOL; MATERNAL MORBIDITY; MATERNAL MORTALITY; MONITORING; NEWBORN MORTALITY; OBSTETRIC DELIVERY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RELIABILITY; BIRTH; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; INFANT; INFANT MORTALITY; MATERNAL HEALTH SERVICE; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; METHODOLOGY; MORTALITY; NEWBORN; PREGNANCY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STANDARDS; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT;

DATA ACCURACY; DELIVERY, OBSTETRIC; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; INDIA; INFANT; INFANT MORTALITY; INFANT, NEWBORN; MATERNAL HEALTH SERVICES; MATERNAL MORTALITY; PARTURITION; PREGNANCY; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; QUALITY INDICATORS, HEALTH CARE; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 85028931414     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17456215     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s13063-017-2159-1     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. CNS Summit Data Quality Monitoring Workgroup Core Members. Data quality monitoring in clinical trials: has it been worth it? An evaluation and prediction of the future by all stakeholders. Innov Clin Neurosci. 2016;13(1-2):27-33.
2. Zozus MNH, Green B, Kahn M, Richesson R, Rusincovitch S, Simon G, Smerek M. Assessing data quality for healthcare systems data used in clinical research (V. 1.0). In Collaboratory phenotypes, data standards, and data quality core. NIH Collaboratory 2014. https://www.nihcollaboratory.org/Products/Assessing-dataquality_V1%200.pdf.
3. Brown J, Kahn M, Toh S. Data quality assessment for comparative effectiveness research in distributed data networks. Med Care. 2013;51(8 0 3):S22-9.
4. Davis JRN, Vivian P, Woodcock J, Estabrook RW. Assuring data quality and validity in clinical trials for regulatory decision making: workshop report. Washington (DC): Institute of Medicine Roundtable on Research and Development of Drugs, Biologics, Medical Devices; 1999.
5. Nahm ML. Data quality in clinical research. In: Richesson RL, editor. Clinical research informatics. London: Springer-Verlag; 2012. p. 175-201.
6. Moher D, et al. Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet. 1998;352(9128):609-13.
7. Alsumidaie MA, Andrianov A. How do we define clinical trial data quality if no guidelines exist? Applied clinical trials. 2015. http://www.appliedclinicaltrialsonline.com/how-do-we-define-clinical-trial-data-quality-if-no-guidelines-exist.
8. Goldhill DR, Sumner A. APACHE II, data accuracy and outcome prediction. Anaesthesia. 1998;53(10):937-43.
9. Richesson RL, et al. Electronic health records based phenotyping in next-generation clinical trials: a perspective from the NIH Health Care Systems Collaboratory. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(e2):e226-31.
10. Society for Clinical Data Management. Good clinical data management practices. 2013.
11. Houston L, Probst Y, Humphries A. Measuring data quality through a source data verification audit in a clinical research setting. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2015;214:107-13.
12. Weiskopf NG, Weng C. Methods and dimensions of electronic health record data quality assessment: enabling reuse for clinical research. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(1):144-51.
13. Kahn MG, et al. A pragmatic framework for single-site and multisite data quality assessment in electronic health record-based clinical research. Med Care. 2012;50:S21-9.
14. Chen H, et al. A review of data quality assessment methods for public health information systems. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014;11(5):5170-207.
15. Nahm ML, Pieper CF, Cunningham MM. Quantifying data quality for clinical trials using electronic data capture. PLoS One. 2008;3(8):e3049.
16. van der Putten E, et al. A pilot study on the quality of data management in a cancer clinical trial. Control Clin Trials. 1987;8(2):96-100.
17. Horbar JD, Leahy KA. An assessment of data quality in the Vermont-Oxford Trials Network Database. Control Clin Trials. 1995;16(1):51-61.
18. Shelby-James TM, et al. Handheld computers for data entry: high tech has its problems too. Trials. 2007;8:5-5.
19. Goldberg SI, Niemierko A, Turchin A. Analysis of data errors in clinical research databases. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2008;2008:242-6.
20. Hong MKH, Yao HHI, Pedersen JS, et al. Error rates in a clinical data repository: lessons from the transition to electronic data transfer-a descriptive study. BMJ Open. 2013;3:e002406.
21. Macefield RC, et al. A systematic review of on-site monitoring methods for health-care randomised controlled trials. Clin Trials. 2013;10(1):104-24.
22. Arts DGT, de Keizer NF, Scheffer G-J. Defining and improving data quality in medical registries: a literature review, case study, and generic framework. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2002;9(6):600-11.
23. Wang RY, Strong DM. Beyond accuracy: what data quality means to data consumers. J Manage Inf Syst. 1996;12(4):5-33.
24. Gassman JJ, et al. Data quality assurance, monitoring, and reporting. Control Clin Trials. 1995;16(2 Suppl):104s-36s.
25. Richardson D, Chen S. Data quality assurance and quality control measures in large multicenter stroke trials: the African-American Antiplatelet Stroke Prevention Study experience. Trials. 2001;2(3):115.
26. Harvard School of Public Health. BetterBirth: a trial of the WHO safe childbirth checklist program. ClinicalTrials.gov [NCT02148952]. National Library of Medicine (US); 2014. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02148952.
27. Semrau K, Hirschhorn LR, Kodkany B, Spector J, Tuller DE, King G, Lisptiz S, Sharma N, Singh VP, Kumar B, Dhingra-Kumar N, Firestone R, Kumar V, Gawande A. Effectiveness of the WHO safe childbirth checklist program in reducing severe maternal, fetal, and newborn harm: study protocol for a matched-pair, cluster randomized controlled trial in Uttar Pradesh, India. Trials. 2016;17(576):1-10.
28. Brown W. Data quality assurance tool for program level indicators. MEASURE Evaluation, 2007.
29. Fitzmaurice GM, et al. Almost efficient estimation of relative risk regression. Biostatistics. 2014;15(4):745-56.
30. Carter RE, Lipsitz SR, Tilley BC. Quasi-likelihood estimation for relative risk regression models. Biostatistics. 2005;6(1):39-44.
31. Needham DM, et al. Improving data quality control in quality improvement projects. International J Qual Health Care. 2009;21(2):145-50.
32. Shojania KG, Grimshaw JM. Evidence-based quality improvement: the state of the science. Health Aff (Millwood). 2005;24(1):138-50.
33. Hayes E, Kalmakis KA. From the sidelines: coaching as a nurse practitioner strategy for improving health outcomes. J Am Acad Nurse Pract. 2007;19(11):555-62.
34. Ivers NM, et al. Growing literature, stagnant science? Systematic review, meta-regression and cumulative analysis of audit and feedback interventions in health care. J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29(11):1534-41.