Data Collection and Quality Control

  • Lawrence M. Friedman
  • Curt D. Furberg
  • David L. DeMets


No study is better than the quality of its data. Data in clinical trials are collected from several sources – interviews, questionnaires, participant examinations, or laboratory determinations. Also, data that have been collected and evaluated by someone outside the study may be used in a trial; for example, diagnoses obtained from death certificates or hospital records.


Scientific Misconduct Improve Data Quality Poor Quality Data Propranolol Hydrochloride Primary Response Variable 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    ICH E6. Good clinical practice: Consolidated guideline, Step 5 as of May 1996.
  2. 2.
    International Conference on Harmonisation. September 2007.
  3. 3.
    Knatterud GL, Rockhold FW, George SL, et al. Guidelines for quality assurance in multicenter trials: A position paper. Control Clin Trials 1998;19:477–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Williams GW. The other side of clinical trial monitoring; assuring data quality and procedural adherence. Clin Trials 2006;3:530–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zon R, Meropol NJ, Catalano RB, Schilsky RL. American Society of Clinical Oncology statement on minimum standards and exemplary attributes of clinical trial sites. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:2562–2567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Devine S, Dagher RN, Weiss KD, Santana VM. Good clinical practice and the conduct of clinical studies in pediatric oncology. Pediatr Clin North Am 2008;55:187–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baigent C, Harrell FE, Buyse M, et al. Ensuring trial validity by data quality assurance and diversification of monitoring methods. Clin Trials 2008;5:49–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Acosta CJ, Galindo CM, Ochiai RL, et al. Implementation of good clinical practice guidelines in vaccine trials in developing countries. Vaccine 2007;25:2852–2857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    McFadden E. Management of Data in Clinical Trials. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Meinert CL. Clinical Trials: Design, Conduct, and Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Neaton JD, Bartsch GE, Broste SK, et al. A case of data alteration in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT). Control Clin Trials 1991;12:731–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fisher B, Redmond CK. Fraud in breast-cancer trials. N Engl J Med 1994;330:1458–1462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Koran LM. The reliability of clinical methods, data and judgments. Part 1. N Engl J Med 1975;293:642–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Koran LM. The reliability of clinical methods, data and judgments. Part 2. N Engl J Med 1975;293:695–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Belk WP, Sunderman FW. A survey of the accuracy of chemical analyses in clinical laboratories. Am J Clin Pathol 1947;17:853–861.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Westgard JO. Basic Method Validation. Madison, Wisconsin: Westgard QC, Inc., 2003, pp 102–103.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    McPherson RA, Pincus MR (eds.). Henry’s Clinical Diagnosis and Management by Laboratory Methods (21st Edition). Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders, Inc., 2007, pp 4–5.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gur D, Bandos AI, Cohen CS, et al. The “laboratory” effect: Comparing radiologists’ performance and variability during prospective clinical and laboratory mammography interpretations. Radiology 2008;249:47–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Panicker GK, Karnad DR, Natekar M, et al. Intra- and interreader variability in QT interval measurement by tangent and threshold methods in central electrocardiogram laboratory. J Electrocardiol 2009;42:348–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fridsma DB, Evans J, Hastak S, Mead CN. The BRIDG project: A technical report. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2008;15:130–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Weng C, Gennari JH, Fridsma DB. User-centered semantic harmonization: A case study. J Biomed Inform 2007;40:353–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Moyers S, Richesson R, Krischer J. Trans-atlantic data harmonization in the classification of medicines and dietary supplements: A challenge for epidemiologic study and clinical research. Int J Med Inform 2008;77:58–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Luepker RV, Evans A, McKeigue P, Reddy KS. Cardiovascular Survey Methods (3rd Edition). Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2004.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cook TD, DeMets DL. Data collection and quality control. In Cook TD, DeMets DL (eds.). Introduction to Statistical Methods for Clinical Trials. Boca Raton, Florida: Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2007, pp 171–200.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kahn HA, Leibowitz H, Gauley JP, et al. Standardizing diagnostic procedures. Am J Ophthalmol 1975;79:768–775.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Neaton JD, Duchene AG, Svendson KH, Wentworth D. An examination of the efficacy of some quality assurance methods commonly employed in clinical trials. Stat Med 1990;9:115–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Furberg CD, Byington RP, Craven TE. Lessons learned from clinical trials with ultrasound endpoints. J Intern Med 1994;236:575–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pogue J, Walter SD, Yusuf S. Evaluating the benefit of event adjudication of cardiovascular outcomes in large simple RCTs. Clin Trials 2009;6:239–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Reboussin D, Espeland MA. The science of web-based clinical trial management. Clin Trials 2005;2:1–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Litchfield J, Freeman J, Schou H, et al. Is the future for clinical trials internet-based? A cluster randomized clinical trial. Clin Trials 2005;2:72–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Winget M, Kincaid H, Lin P, et al. A web-based system for managing and co-ordinating multiple multisite studies. Clin Trials 2005;2:42–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Schmidt JR, Vignati AJ, Pogash RM, et al. Web-based distributed data management in the Childhood Asthma Research and Education (CARE) Network. Clin Trials 2005;2:50–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mitchell R, Shah M, Ahmad S, et al. for the Adolescent Medicine Trials Network for HIV/AIDS interventions. A unified web-based query and notification system (QNS) for subject management, adverse events, regulatory, and IRB components of clinical trials. Clin Trials 2005;2:61–71.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Eisenstein EL, Lemons II PW, Tardiff BE, et al. Reducing the costs of phase III cardiovascular clinical trials. Am Heart J 2005;149:482–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Eisenstein EL, Collins R, Cracknell BS, et al. Sensible approaches for reducing clinical trial costs. Clin Trials 2008;5:75–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lachin JM. The role of measurement reliability in clinical trials. Clin Trials 2004;1:553–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Weiss RB, Vogelzang NJ, Peterson BA, et al. A successful system of scientific data audits for clinical trials. JAMA 1993;270:459–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Weiss RB. Systems of protocol review, quality assurance, and data audit. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1998;42(suppl):S88–S92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Soran A, Nesbitt L, Mamounas EP, et al. Centralized medical monitoring in phase III clinical trials: The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) experience. Clin Trials 2006;3:478–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Reynolds SM. ORI findings of scientific misconduct in clinical trials and publicly funded research, 1992-2002. Clin Trials 2004;1:509–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service policies on research misconduct. Final rule. Fed Regist 2005;70:28370–28400.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Karlberg JPE. US FDA site inspection findings, 1997-2008, fail to justify globalization concerns. Clin Trial Magnifier 2009;2:194–212.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer New York 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lawrence M. Friedman
    • 1
  • Curt D. Furberg
    • 2
  • David L. DeMets
    • 3
  1. 1.BethesdaUSA
  2. 2.School of MedicineWake Forest UniversityWinston-SalemUSA
  3. 3.Department of Biostatistics & Medical InformaticsUniversity of WisconsinMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations