17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A metadata schema for data objects in clinical research

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          A large number of stakeholders have accepted the need for greater transparency in clinical research and, in the context of various initiatives and systems, have developed a diverse and expanding number of repositories for storing the data and documents created by clinical studies (collectively known as data objects). To make the best use of such resources, we assert that it is also necessary for stakeholders to agree and deploy a simple, consistent metadata scheme.

          Methods

          The relevant data objects and their likely storage are described, and the requirements for metadata to support data sharing in clinical research are identified. Issues concerning persistent identifiers, for both studies and data objects, are explored.

          Results

          A scheme is proposed that is based on the DataCite standard, with extensions to cover the needs of clinical researchers, specifically to provide (a) study identification data, including links to clinical trial registries; (b) data object characteristics and identifiers; and (c) data covering location, ownership and access to the data object. The components of the metadata scheme are described.

          Conclusions

          The metadata schema is proposed as a natural extension of a widely agreed standard to fill a gap not tackled by other standards related to clinical research (e.g., Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium, Biomedical Research Integrated Domain Group). The proposal could be integrated with, but is not dependent on, other moves to better structure data in clinical research.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1686-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references9

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Sharing clinical trial data: maximizing benefits, minimizing risk.

          Bernard Lo (2015)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Rationale for WHO's New Position Calling for Prompt Reporting and Public Disclosure of Interventional Clinical Trial Results

            Vasee Moorthy and colleagues explain why the WHO is calling for public disclosure of clinical trial results.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              “Hardly worth the effort”? Medical journals’ policies and their editors’ and publishers’ views on trial registration and publication bias: quantitative and qualitative study

              Objectives To determine the proportion of medical journals requiring trial registration and to understand their reasons for adopting (or not adopting) such policies and other measures designed to reduce publication bias. Design Quantitative study of journals’ instructions to authors (in June 2012) and qualitative study of editors’ and publishers’ views on trial registration and publication bias (carried out in Autumn 2012). Setting Random selection of 200 medical journals publishing clinical trials identified from the Cochrane CENTRAL database. Participants Editors (n=13) and publishers (n=3) of journals with different policies on trial registration (and with recently changed policies) identified from the survey of their instructions to authors. Results Only 55/200 journals (28%) required trial registration according to their instructions and a further three (2%) encouraged it. The editors and publishers interviewed explained their journals’ reluctance to require registration in terms of not wanting to lose out to rival journals, not wanting to reject otherwise sound articles or submissions from developing countries, and perceptions that such policies were not relevant to all journals. Some interviewees considered that registration was unnecessary for small or exploratory studies. Conclusions Although many major medical journals state that they will only publish clinical trials that have been prospectively registered, and such policies have been associated with a dramatic increase in the number of trials being registered, most smaller journals have not adopted such policies. Editors and publishers may be reluctant to require registration because they do not understand its benefits or because they fear that adopting such a policy would put their journal at a disadvantage to competitors.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                steve@canhamis.eu
                christian.ohmann@med.uni-duesseldorf.de
                Journal
                Trials
                Trials
                Trials
                BioMed Central (London )
                1745-6215
                24 November 2016
                24 November 2016
                2016
                : 17
                : 557
                Affiliations
                [1 ]European Clinical Research Infrastructure Network (ECRIN), Kings Avenue, Redhill, RH16QH UK
                [2 ]European Clinical Research Infrastructure Network (ECRIN), Kaiserswerther Strasse 70, 40477 Düsseldorf, Germany
                Article
                1686
                10.1186/s13063-016-1686-5
                5122021
                27881150
                c368e389-1df2-4c6c-bb2b-d17296ee256c
                © The Author(s). 2016

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 24 June 2016
                : 5 November 2016
                Funding
                Funded by: EU H2020
                Award ID: 654248
                Categories
                Methodology
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Medicine
                metadata,standards,data sharing,transparency,data repositories,identifiers,european clinical research infrastructure network,ecrin

                Comments

                Comment on this article