2008
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0050006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Could an Open-Source Clinical Trial Data-Management System Be What We Have All Been Looking For?

Abstract: The authors argue that research organizations and funders should combine efforts to produce an open-source solution for trial data management.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
33
0
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
33
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Despite the benefits, commercial EDC systems are expensive [13] and frequently non-customizable. They have been considered inadequate in context to the needs of healthcare stakeholders (clinicians, administrators, and patients) [46].…”
Section: Commercial Edc Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Despite the benefits, commercial EDC systems are expensive [13] and frequently non-customizable. They have been considered inadequate in context to the needs of healthcare stakeholders (clinicians, administrators, and patients) [46].…”
Section: Commercial Edc Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite being feature rich, scalable, secure and compliant to industry standards, these EDC systems are prohibitively expensive [13], thus limiting their use by individual investigators and users from developing countries that do not having adequate funding but are interested in research participation.…”
Section: Commercial Edc Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Anecdotal evidence suggests that the reduction in development time may range between 20% and 80%, depending upon the organizational context. Based on the early evaluations mentioned in Section 2, it seems that the reduction in licensing costs can be measured in terms of the cost of a Microsoft Office SharePoint Server select license (of the order of £1000, covering arbitrarily many studies) against that for a typical solution based on commercial domain-specific tools (which "would cost in the range of hundreds of thousands of dollars" [17]). …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Features such as audit trails, double data entry, queries, and data access restrictions make the software useful for both clinical trails and for a number of descriptive epidemiological studies at MRU [3].…”
Section: Softwarementioning
confidence: 99%