Advertisement

Clinical Research Information Systems

  • Prakash M. NadkarniEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Health Informatics book series (HI)

Abstract

Information systems can support a host of functions and activities within clinical research enterprises. We consider issues and workflows unique to clinical research that mandate the use of a Clinical Research Information System and distinguish its functionality from that provided by electronic medical record systems. We then describe the operations of a CRIS during different phases of a study. We finally discuss briefly the issues of standards and certification.

Keywords

Clinical research information systems Clinical study data management Research data management Regulatory support systems Research logistics support Real-time electronic data validation 

References

  1. 1.
    Eisenstein EL, Collins R, Cracknell BS, Podesta O, Reid ED, Sandercock P, Shakhov Y, Terrin ML, Sellers MA, Califf RM, Granger CB, Diaz R. Sensible approaches for reducing clinical trial costs. Clin Trials. 2008;5(1):75–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Frank E, Cassano GB, Rucci P, Fagiolini A, Maggi L, Kraemer HC, Kupfer DJ, Pollock B, Bies R, Nimgaonkar V, Pilkonis P, Shear MK, Thompson WK, Grochocinski VJ, Scocco P, Buttenfield J, Forgione RN. Addressing the challenges of a cross-national investigation: lessons from the Pittsburgh-Pisa study of treatment-relevant phenotypes of unipolar depression. Clin Trials. 2008;5(3):253–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospital Organizations. National Patient Safety Goals. Available at http://www.jointcommission.org/PatientSafety/NationalPatientSafetyGoals/08_hap_npsgs.htm. Last accessed 12/03/09.
  4. 4.
    Crane D, Pascarello E, James D. AJAX in action. Greenwich: Manning Publications Co; 2005.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Van den Broeck J, Mackay M, Mpontshane N, Kany Kany Luabeya A, Chhagan M, Bennish ML. Maintaining data integrity in a rural clinical trial. Clin Trials. 2007;4(5):572–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Thwin SS, Clough-Gorr KM, McCarty MC, Lash TL, Alford SH, Buist DS, Enger SM, Field TS, Frost F, Wei F, Silliman RA. Automated inter-rater reliability assessment and electronic data collection in a multi-center breast cancer study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;18(7):23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wikipedia. Computerized Adaptive Testing. Available at: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computerized_adaptive_testing. Last accessed 12/1/09.
  8. 8.
    Cella D, Yount S, Rothrock N, Gershon R, Cook K, Reeve B, Ader D, Fries JF, Bruce B, Rose M. The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): progress of an NIH roadmap cooperative group during its first two years. Med Care. 2007;45(5):S3–S11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Day S, Fayers P, Harvey D. Double data entry: what value, what price? Contemp Clin Trials. 1998;19(1):15–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wyatt JC, Altman DG, Heathfield HA, Pantin CF. Development of design-a-trial, a knowledge-based critiquing system for authors of clinical trial protocols. Comput Methods Prog Biomed. 1994;43(3–4):283–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Modgil S, Hammond P. LinksDecision support tools for clinical trial design. Artif Intell Med. 2003;27(2):181–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rubin DL, Gennari J, Musen MA LinksKnowledge: representation and tool support for critiquing clinical trial protocols. Proc AMIA Symp. 2000:724–8.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dupont WD, Plummer WD. Power and sample size calculations: a review and computer program. Control Clin Trials. 1990;11:116–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gennari JH, Sklar D, Silva J. LinksCross-tool communication: from protocol authoring to eligibility determination. Proc AMIA Symp. 2001:199–203.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    National Cancer Institute. Cancer center participant registry. Information available at: https://cabig.nci.nih.gov/tools/c3pr. Last accessed 12/01/09.
  16. 16.
    National Cancer Institute. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) and Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC). 2009 Available from: http://ctep.cancer.gov/protocolDevelopment/electronic_applications/ctc.htm. Last accessed 1/2/18.
  17. 17.
    Richesson RL, Malloy JF, Paulus K, Cuthbertson D, Krischer JP. An automated standardized system for managing adverse events in clinical research networks. Drug Saf. 2008;31(10):807–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang X, Hripcsak G, Markatou M, Friedman C. Active computerized pharmacovigilance using natural language processing, statistics, and electronic health records: a feasibility study. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009;16:328–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kaner C, Falk J, Nguyen HQ. Testing computer software. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley; 1999.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Patsopoulos NA. A pragmatic view on pragmatic trials. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 13(2):217–24. PMC ID: PMC3181997.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wikipedia. User-centered design. Available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/user_centered_design. Last accessed: 1/2/18.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Interdisciplinary Graduate Program in Informatics and College of NursingUniversity of IowaIowa CityUSA

Personalised recommendations