Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital

Central data monitoring in the multicentre randomised SafeBoosC-III trial - a pragmatic approach

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review


  1. Using Trial Sequential Analysis for estimating the sample sizes of further trials: example using smoking cessation intervention

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. International severe asthma registry (ISAR): protocol for a global registry

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. DEBATE-statistical analysis plans for observational studies

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  4. Trial Sequential Analysis in systematic reviews with meta-analysis

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Vis graf over relationer

BACKGROUND: Data monitoring of clinical trials is a tool aimed at reducing the risks of random errors (e.g. clerical errors) and systematic errors, which include misinterpretation, misunderstandings, and fabrication. Traditional 'good clinical practice data monitoring' with on-site monitors increases trial costs and is time consuming for the local investigators. This paper aims to outline our approach of time-effective central data monitoring for the SafeBoosC-III multicentre randomised clinical trial and present the results from the first three central data monitoring meetings.

METHODS: The present approach to central data monitoring was implemented for the SafeBoosC-III trial, a large, pragmatic, multicentre, randomised clinical trial evaluating the benefits and harms of treatment based on cerebral oxygenation monitoring in preterm infants during the first days of life versus monitoring and treatment as usual. We aimed to optimise completeness and quality and to minimise deviations, thereby limiting random and systematic errors. We designed an automated report which was blinded to group allocation, to ease the work of data monitoring. The central data monitoring group first reviewed the data using summary plots only, and thereafter included the results of the multivariate Mahalanobis distance of each centre from the common mean. The decisions of the group were manually added to the reports for dissemination, information, correcting errors, preventing furture errors and documentation.

RESULTS: The first three central monitoring meetings identified 156 entries of interest, decided upon contacting the local investigators for 146 of these, which resulted in correction of 53 entries. Multiple systematic errors and protocol violations were identified, one of these included 103/818 randomised participants. Accordingly, the electronic participant record form (ePRF) was improved to reduce ambiguity.

DISCUSSION: We present a methodology for central data monitoring to optimise quality control and quality development. The initial results included identification of random errors in data entries leading to correction of the ePRF, systematic protocol violations, and potential protocol adherence issues. Central data monitoring may optimise concurrent data completeness and may help timely detection of data deviations due to misunderstandings or fabricated data.

TidsskriftBMC Medical Research Methodology
Udgave nummer1
Sider (fra-til)160
StatusUdgivet - 31 jul. 2021

ID: 67052087