MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2753303616 · doi:10.1177/2168479017718875

Optimizing the Use of Electronic Data Sources in Clinical Trials: The Technology Landscape

2017· article· en· W2753303616 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTherapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Computing and Data Management
Canadian institutionsPfizer (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteroperabilityElectronic data captureData collectionProcess (computing)BusinessHealth careModalitiesPharmacyProcess managementKnowledge managementMarketingClinical trialComputer scienceMedicinePolitical scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TransCelerate has created an initiative to facilitate the industry's movement toward optimal use of electronic data sources for clinical research. Although guidance and standards have been in place for some time, gaps remain. Consequently, transcription among electronic systems continues to be the norm. In the initial phase of the eSource Initiative, TransCelerate is developing a thorough understanding of the current landscape. As a preliminary step in this process, the TransCelerate eSource Initiative published Optimizing the Use of Electronic Data Sources in Clinical Trials: The Landscape Part I, which provided insight into sponsor company eSource activities and the environment affecting eSource adoption based on input from TransCelerate member companies, standards organizations, and regulatory authorities. For Part II (this article), TransCelerate surveyed technology companies, including CROs providing technology, to better understand capabilities available today, plans for eSource, and perceived barriers to greater adoption. This information is a vital input that will help shape upcoming TransCelerate proposals for best practices for industry utilization of electronic data collection tools and methods. It is clear from the survey results that the technologies needed to support the various eSource modalities are mature. However, the approach to implementing eSource is fragmented. Greater collaboration is needed not only within the pharmaceutical industry but across industries that include health care and technology. The industry must reach common understandings about novel endpoints, data standards, system validation, and related issues. While technology in itself is not a significant barrier to eSource implementation, interoperability among systems is an enormous challenge to establishing a complete end-to-end electronic health care and research ecosystem. The TransCelerate eSource Initiative will continue to evaluate the technology, regulatory environment, data standards, and health care landscape to support the goal of improving global clinical science and global clinical trial execution. Forthcoming publications will focus on future vision and demonstration projects.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.153
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.801
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1530.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0110.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.668
GPT teacher head0.532
Teacher spread0.136 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it