Time and cost of linking administrative datasets for outcomes assessment in a follow-up study of participants from two randomised trials.

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMC Medical Research Methodology Pub Date : 2025-01-27 DOI:10.1186/s12874-025-02458-9
Mohammad Shahbaz, Jane E Harding, Barry Milne, Anthony Walters, Lisa Underwood, Martin von Randow, Lena Jacob, Greg D Gamble
{"title":"Time and cost of linking administrative datasets for outcomes assessment in a follow-up study of participants from two randomised trials.","authors":"Mohammad Shahbaz, Jane E Harding, Barry Milne, Anthony Walters, Lisa Underwood, Martin von Randow, Lena Jacob, Greg D Gamble","doi":"10.1186/s12874-025-02458-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>For the follow-up of participants in randomised trials, data linkage is thought a more cost-efficient method for assessing outcomes. However, researchers often encounter technical and budgetary challenges. Data requests often require a significant amount of information from researchers, and can take several years to process. This study aimed to determine the feasibility, direct costs and the total time required to access administrative datasets for assessment of outcomes in a follow-up study of two randomised trials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We applied to access administrative datasets from New Zealand government agencies. All actions of study team members, along with their corresponding dates, were recorded prospectively for accessing data from each agency. Team members estimated the average time they spent on each action, and invoices from agencies were recorded. Additionally, we compared the estimated costs and time required for data linkage with those for obtaining self-reported questionnaires and conducting in-person assessments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight agencies were approached to supply data, of which seven gave approval. The time from first enquiry to receiving an initial dataset ranged from 96 to 854 days. For 859 participants, the estimated time required to obtain outcome data from agencies was 1,530 min; to obtain completed self-reported questionnaires was 11,025 min; and to complete in-person assessments was 77,310 min. The estimated total costs were 20,827 NZD for data linkage, 11,735 NZD for self-reported questionnaires, and 116,085 NZD for in-person assessments. Using this data, we estimate that for a cohort of 100 participants, the costs would be similar for data linkage and in-person assessments. For a cohort of 5,000 participants, we estimate that costs would be similar for data linkage and questionnaires, but ten-fold higher for in-person assessments.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Obtaining administrative datasets demands a substantial amount of time and effort. However, data linkage is a feasible method for outcome ascertainment in follow-up studies in New Zealand. For large cohorts, data linkage is likely to be less costly, whereas for small cohorts, in-person assessment has similar costs but is likely to be faster and allows direct assessment of outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":9114,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Research Methodology","volume":"25 1","pages":"21"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11771019/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Research Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-025-02458-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: For the follow-up of participants in randomised trials, data linkage is thought a more cost-efficient method for assessing outcomes. However, researchers often encounter technical and budgetary challenges. Data requests often require a significant amount of information from researchers, and can take several years to process. This study aimed to determine the feasibility, direct costs and the total time required to access administrative datasets for assessment of outcomes in a follow-up study of two randomised trials.

Methods: We applied to access administrative datasets from New Zealand government agencies. All actions of study team members, along with their corresponding dates, were recorded prospectively for accessing data from each agency. Team members estimated the average time they spent on each action, and invoices from agencies were recorded. Additionally, we compared the estimated costs and time required for data linkage with those for obtaining self-reported questionnaires and conducting in-person assessments.

Results: Eight agencies were approached to supply data, of which seven gave approval. The time from first enquiry to receiving an initial dataset ranged from 96 to 854 days. For 859 participants, the estimated time required to obtain outcome data from agencies was 1,530 min; to obtain completed self-reported questionnaires was 11,025 min; and to complete in-person assessments was 77,310 min. The estimated total costs were 20,827 NZD for data linkage, 11,735 NZD for self-reported questionnaires, and 116,085 NZD for in-person assessments. Using this data, we estimate that for a cohort of 100 participants, the costs would be similar for data linkage and in-person assessments. For a cohort of 5,000 participants, we estimate that costs would be similar for data linkage and questionnaires, but ten-fold higher for in-person assessments.

Conclusions: Obtaining administrative datasets demands a substantial amount of time and effort. However, data linkage is a feasible method for outcome ascertainment in follow-up studies in New Zealand. For large cohorts, data linkage is likely to be less costly, whereas for small cohorts, in-person assessment has similar costs but is likely to be faster and allows direct assessment of outcomes.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Medical Research Methodology
BMC Medical Research Methodology 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.50%
发文量
298
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Research Methodology is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in methodological approaches to healthcare research. Articles on the methodology of epidemiological research, clinical trials and meta-analysis/systematic review are particularly encouraged, as are empirical studies of the associations between choice of methodology and study outcomes. BMC Medical Research Methodology does not aim to publish articles describing scientific methods or techniques: these should be directed to the BMC journal covering the relevant biomedical subject area.
期刊最新文献
Bayesian dynamic borrowing in group-sequential design for medical device studies. Measuring adversity in the ABCD® Study: systematic review and recommendations for best practices. Sample size recalculation based on the overall success rate in a randomized test-treatment trial with restricting randomization to discordant pairs. Using artificial intelligence for systematic review: the example of elicit. A flexible framework for local-level estimation of the effective reproductive number in geographic regions with sparse data.
×
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