Lessons on the use of real-world data in medical device research: findings from the National Evaluation System for Health Technology Test-Cases.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of comparative effectiveness research Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-16 DOI:10.57264/cer-2024-0078
Justin W Timbie, Alice Y Kim, Lawrence Baker, Rosemary Li, Thomas W Concannon
{"title":"Lessons on the use of real-world data in medical device research: findings from the National Evaluation System for Health Technology Test-Cases.","authors":"Justin W Timbie, Alice Y Kim, Lawrence Baker, Rosemary Li, Thomas W Concannon","doi":"10.57264/cer-2024-0078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> Although the US FDA encourages manufacturers of medical devices to submit real-world evidence (RWE) to support regulatory decisions, the ability of real-world data (RWD) to generate evidence suitable for decision making remains unclear. The 2017 Medical Device User Fee Amendments (MDUFA IV), authorized the National Evaluation System for health Technology Coordinating Center (NESTcc) to conduct pilot projects, or 'Test-Cases', to assess whether current RWD captures the information needed to answer research questions proposed by industry stakeholders. We synthesized key lessons about the challenges conducting research with RWD and the strategies used by research teams to enhance their ability to generate evidence from RWD based on 18 Test-Cases conducted between 2020 and 2022. <b>Materials & methods:</b> We reviewed study protocols and reports from each Test-Case team and conducted 49 semi-structured interviews with representatives of participating organizations. Interview transcripts were coded and thematically analyzed. <b>Results:</b> Challenges that stakeholders encountered in working with RWD included the lack of unique device identifiers, capturing key data elements and their appropriate meaning in structured data, limited reliability of diagnosis and procedure codes in structured data, extracting information from unstructured electronic health record (EHR) data, limited capture of long-term study end points, missing data and data sharing. Successful strategies included using manufacturer and supply chain data, leveraging clinical registries and registry reporting processes to collect and aggregate data, querying standardized EHR data, implementing natural language processing algorithms and using multidisciplinary research teams. <b>Conclusion:</b> The Test-Cases identified numerous challenges working with RWD but also opportunities to address these challenges and improve researchers' ability to use RWD to generate evidence on medical devices.</p>","PeriodicalId":15539,"journal":{"name":"Journal of comparative effectiveness research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11367563/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of comparative effectiveness research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2024-0078","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: Although the US FDA encourages manufacturers of medical devices to submit real-world evidence (RWE) to support regulatory decisions, the ability of real-world data (RWD) to generate evidence suitable for decision making remains unclear. The 2017 Medical Device User Fee Amendments (MDUFA IV), authorized the National Evaluation System for health Technology Coordinating Center (NESTcc) to conduct pilot projects, or 'Test-Cases', to assess whether current RWD captures the information needed to answer research questions proposed by industry stakeholders. We synthesized key lessons about the challenges conducting research with RWD and the strategies used by research teams to enhance their ability to generate evidence from RWD based on 18 Test-Cases conducted between 2020 and 2022. Materials & methods: We reviewed study protocols and reports from each Test-Case team and conducted 49 semi-structured interviews with representatives of participating organizations. Interview transcripts were coded and thematically analyzed. Results: Challenges that stakeholders encountered in working with RWD included the lack of unique device identifiers, capturing key data elements and their appropriate meaning in structured data, limited reliability of diagnosis and procedure codes in structured data, extracting information from unstructured electronic health record (EHR) data, limited capture of long-term study end points, missing data and data sharing. Successful strategies included using manufacturer and supply chain data, leveraging clinical registries and registry reporting processes to collect and aggregate data, querying standardized EHR data, implementing natural language processing algorithms and using multidisciplinary research teams. Conclusion: The Test-Cases identified numerous challenges working with RWD but also opportunities to address these challenges and improve researchers' ability to use RWD to generate evidence on medical devices.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在医疗设备研究中使用真实世界数据的经验教训:国家卫生技术测试案例评估系统的发现。
目的:尽管美国 FDA 鼓励医疗器械制造商提交真实世界证据 (RWE) 以支持监管决策,但真实世界数据 (RWD) 生成适合决策的证据的能力仍不明确。2017 年《医疗器械使用费修正案》(MDUFA IV)授权国家卫生技术评估系统协调中心(NESTcc)开展试点项目或 "测试案例",以评估当前的真实世界数据是否能捕捉到回答行业利益相关者提出的研究问题所需的信息。我们根据 2020 年至 2022 年间开展的 18 个 "测试案例",总结了利用 RWD 开展研究面临的挑战以及研究团队为提高从 RWD 中获取证据的能力而采取的策略等方面的主要经验。材料与方法:我们审查了每个测试案例团队的研究协议和报告,并与参与组织的代表进行了 49 次半结构化访谈。我们对访谈记录进行了编码和主题分析。结果利益相关者在使用 RWD 时遇到的挑战包括:缺乏唯一的设备标识符、在结构化数据中捕获关键数据元素及其适当含义、结构化数据中诊断和手术代码的可靠性有限、从非结构化电子健康记录 (EHR) 数据中提取信息、对长期研究终点的捕获有限、数据缺失和数据共享。成功的策略包括使用制造商和供应链数据、利用临床登记和登记报告流程收集和汇总数据、查询标准化电子病历数据、实施自然语言处理算法以及使用多学科研究团队。结论测试案例发现了使用 RWD 所面临的众多挑战,同时也发现了应对这些挑战的机会,以及提高研究人员使用 RWD 生成医疗设备证据的能力的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of comparative effectiveness research
Journal of comparative effectiveness research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
121
期刊介绍: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research provides a rapid-publication platform for debate, and for the presentation of new findings and research methodologies. Through rigorous evaluation and comprehensive coverage, the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research provides stakeholders (including patients, clinicians, healthcare purchasers, and health policy makers) with the key data and opinions to make informed and specific decisions on clinical practice.
期刊最新文献
Dependent censoring bias assessment using inverse probability of censoring weights: Type 2 diabetes mellitus risk in patients initiating bisoprolol versus other antihypertensives in a Clinical Practice Research Datalink cohort study. Access in all areas? A round up of developments in market access and HTA: part 5. Cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening with volume computed tomography in Portugal. Use of transportability methods for real-world evidence generation: a review of current applications. Ravulizumab for adults with generalized myasthenia gravis: a plain language summary of three studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1