Top

Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Review

Scoping review of the recommendations and guidance for improving the quality of rare disease registries

Authors: JE Tarride, A. Okoh, K. Aryal, C. Prada, Deborah Milinkovic, A. Keepanasseril, A. Iorio

Published in: Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases | Issue 1/2024

Abstract

Background

Rare disease registries (RDRs) are valuable tools for improving clinical care and advancing research. However, they often vary qualitatively, structurally, and operationally in ways that can determine their potential utility as a source of evidence to support decision-making regarding the approval and funding of new treatments for rare diseases.

Objectives

The goal of this research project was to review the literature on rare disease registries and identify best practices to improve the quality of RDRs.

Methods

In this scoping review, we searched MEDLINE and EMBASE as well as the websites of regulatory bodies and health technology assessment agencies from 2010 to April 2023 for literature offering guidance or recommendations to ensure, improve, or maintain quality RDRs.

Results

The search yielded 1,175 unique references, of which 64 met the inclusion criteria. The characteristics of RDRs deemed to be relevant to their quality align with three main domains and several sub-domains considered to be best practices for quality RDRs: (1) governance (registry purpose and description; governance structure; stakeholder engagement; sustainability; ethics/legal/privacy; data governance; documentation; and training and support); (2) data (standardized disease classification; common data elements; data dictionary; data collection; data quality and assurance; and data analysis and reporting); and (3) information technology (IT) infrastructure (physical and virtual infrastructure; and software infrastructure guided by FAIR principles (Findability; Accessibility; Interoperability; and Reusability).

Conclusions

Although RDRs face numerous challenges due to their small and dispersed populations, RDRs can generate quality data to support healthcare decision-making through the use of standards and principles on strong governance, quality data practices, and IT infrastructure.

Available only for authorised users

Canada’s Drug and Health Technology Agency (CADTH): Ahead of the Curve: Shaping Future-Ready Health System. (2022). https://strategicplan.cadth.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/cadth_2022_2025_strategic_plan.pdf. Accessed March 15, 2023.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE): NICE strategy 2021 to 2026 - Dynamic, Collaborative, Excellent. (2021). https://static.nice.org.uk/NICE%20strategy%202021%20to%202026%20-%20Dynamic,%20Collaborative,%20Excellent.pdf. Accessed March 15, 2023.

Wang SV, Pinheiro S, Hua W, Arlett P, Uyama Y, Berlin JA, et al. STaRT-RWE: structured template for planning and reporting on the implementation of real world evidence studies. BMJ. 2021;372:m4856. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m4856.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

ISPOR: New Real-World Evidence Registry Launches. (2021). https://www.ispor.org/heor-resources/news-top/news/view/2021/10/26/new-real-world-evidence-registry-launches. Accessed March 15, 2023.

Corrigan-Curay J, Sacks L, Woodcock J. JAMA. 2018;320(9):867–8. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.10136. Real-World Evidence and Real-World Data for Evaluating Drug Safety and Effectiveness.

Finger RP, Daien V, Talks JS, Mitchell P, Wong TY, Sakamoto T, et al. A novel tool to assess the quality of RWE to guide the management of retinal disease. Acta Ophthalmol. 2021;99(6):604–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.14698.CrossRefPubMed

Schneeweiss S, Eichler HG, Garcia-Altes A, Chinn C, Eggimann AV, Garner S, et al. Real World Data in Adaptive Biomedical Innovation: a Framework for Generating evidence fit for decision-making. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2016;100(6):633–46. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpt.512.CrossRefPubMed

Gliklich RE, Leavy MB. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2020;54(2):303–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-019-00058-6. Assessing Real-World Data Quality: The Application of Patient Registry Quality Criteria to Real-World Data and Real-World Evidence.

Reynolds MW, Bourke A, Dreyer NA. Considerations when evaluating real-world data quality in the context of fitness for purpose. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2020;29(10):1316–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.5010.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Government of Canada: Building a National Strategy for High-Cost Drugs for Rare Diseases: A Discussion Paper for Engaging Canadians: A discussion Paper for Engaging Canadians. (2021). https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/hc-sc/documents/services/health-related-consultation/National-Strategy-High-Cost-Drugs-eng.pdf. Accessed July 20, 2023.

11.

The Canadian Forum for Rare Disease Innovators (RAREi). Unique approach needed: Addressing barriers to accessing rare disease treatments. Submission to House of Commons Standing Committee on Health (HESA). https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/421/HESA/Brief/BR10189782/br-external/CanadianForumForRareDiseasesInnovators-e.pdf (2013). Accessed November 8, 2023.

12.

European Medicines Agency: Discussion paper: Use of patient disease registries for regulatory purposes – methodological and operational considerations. (2018). https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ema.europa.eu%2Fen%2Fdocuments%2Fother%2Fdiscussion-paper-use-patient-disease-registries-regulatory-purposes-methodological-operational_en.docx&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK. Accessed November 17, 2023.

13.

Gliklich RE, Leavy MB, Dreyer NA. Registries for evaluating patient outcomes: a user’s guide (4th Eds.) (Prepared by L&M Policy Research, LLC under Contract No. 290-2014-00004-C with partners OM1 and IQVIA) (2020). https://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/registries-evaluating-patient-outcomes-4th-edition.pdf. Accessed March 7, 2023.

14.

Canada’s Drug and Health Technology Agency (cadth). Optimizing the Integration of Real–World Evidence as Part of Decision-Making for Drugs for Rare Diseases. What We Learned https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/RWE/pdf/optimizing_the_integration_of_real_world_evidence_as_part_of_decision-making_for_drugs_for_rare_diseases.pdf. Accessed November 8, 2023.

15.

Canada’s Drug and Health Technology Agency (cadth): Report on a Best Brains Exchange. Optimizing the Use of Real-World Evidence as Part of Decision-Making for Drugs for Rare Diseases. (2022). https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/RWE/pdf/MG0022_best_brains_exchange_optimizing_the_use_of_real_world_evidence_as_part_of_decision_making_for_drugs_for_rare_diseases.pdf. Accessed November 8, 2023.

16.

Ali SR, Bryce J, Tan LE, Hiort O, Pereira AM, van den Akker ELT, et al. The EuRRECa Project as a model for Data Access and Governance policies for Rare Disease registries that collect clinical outcomes. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(23). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17238743.

17.

Allen A, Patrick H, Ruof J, Buchberger B, Varela-Lema L, Kirschner J, et al. Development and Pilot Test of the Registry evaluation and quality standards Tool: an Information Technology-based Tool to support and review registries. Value Health: J Int Soc Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res. 2022;25(8):1390–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2021.12.018.CrossRef

18.

Jonker CJ, de Vries ST, van den Berg HM, McGettigan P, Hoes AW, Mol PGM. Capturing data in Rare Disease registries to Support Regulatory decision making: a Survey Study among Industry and other stakeholders. Drug Saf. 2021;44(8):853–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-021-01081-z.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

EUnetHTA. REQueST: Tool and its vision paper. https://eunethta.eu/request-tool-and-its-vision-paper/ Accessed February 14, 2024.

20.

Zaletel M, Kralj M. Methodological guidelines and recommendations for efficient and rational governance of patient registries (2015). https://health.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2016-11/patient_registries_guidelines_en_0.pdf. Accessed September 14, 2023.

21.

Boyle L, Gautam M, Gorospe M, Kleiman Y, Dan L, Lynn E et al. Assessing Canadian Rare Disease Patient Registries for Real-World Evidence Using REQueST (2022). https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/es0369-cadth-poster-laurie-lambert-final.pdf. Accessed March 15, 2023.

22.

Sucharew H, Macaluso M. Methods for Research evidence synthesis: the Scoping Review Approach. J Hosp Med. 2019;14:416–8. https://doi.org/10.12788/jhm.3248.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Rare Disease Task Force: Patient registries in the field of rare diseases: overview of the issues surrounding the establishment, management, governance and financing of academic registries. (2011). https://www.orpha.net/actor/EuropaNews/2011/doc/RDTFReportRegistries2009Rev2011.pdf. Accessed March 7, 2023.

24.

Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A. Rayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016;5(1):210. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Kodra Y, Weinbach J, Posada-de-la-Paz M, Coi A, Lemonnier SL, van Enckevort D, et al. Recommendations for improving the quality of Rare Disease registries. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15081644.

26.

Gainotti S, Torreri P, Wang CM, Reihs R, Mueller H, Heslop E, et al. Eur J Hum genetics: EJHG. 2018;26(5):631–43. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-017-0085-z. The RD-Connect Registry & Biobank Finder: a tool for sharing aggregated data and metadata among rare disease researchers

27.

Bellgard MI, Napier KR, Bittles AH, Szer J, Fletcher S, Zeps N, et al. Design of a framework for the deployment of collaborative independent rare disease-centric registries: Gaucher disease registry model. Blood Cells Mol Dis. 2018;68:232–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcmd.2017.01.013.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Biedermann P, Ong R, Davydov A, Orlova A, Solovyev P, Sun H, et al. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021;21(1):238. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01434-3. Standardizing registry data to the OMOP Common Data Model: experience from three pulmonary hypertension databases.

29.

Boulanger V, Schlemmer M, Rossov S, Seebald A, Gavin P. Establishing patient registries for Rare diseases: Rationale and challenges. Pharm Med. 2020;34(3):185–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40290-020-00332-1.CrossRef

30.

Busner J, Pandina G, Domingo SZ, Berger AK, Acosta MT, Fisseha N, et al. Clinician-and patient-reported endpoints in CNS orphan drug clinical trials: ISCTM position paper on best practices for Endpoint Selection, Validation, Training, and standardization. Innovations Clin Neurosci. 2021;18(10–12):15–22.

31.

Derayeh S, Kazemi A, Rabiei R, Hosseini A, Moghaddasi H. National information system for rare diseases with an approach to data architecture: a systematic review. Intractable rare Dis Res. 2018;7(3):156–63. https://doi.org/10.5582/irdr.2018.01065.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Marques JP, Carvalho AL, Henriques J, Murta JN, Saraiva J, Silva R. Design, development and deployment of a web-based interoperable registry for inherited retinal dystrophies in Portugal: the IRD-PT. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2020;15(1):304. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-020-01591-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Rubinstein YR, Groft SC, Bartek R, Brown K, Christensen RA, Collier E, et al. Creating a global rare disease patient registry linked to a rare diseases biorepository database: Rare Disease-HUB (RD-HUB). Contemp Clin Trials. 2010;31(5):394–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2010.06.007.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

34.

National Cancer Registry Ireland: Data confidentiality in the National Cancer Registry. (2007). https://www.ncri.ie/data.cgi/html/confidentialitypolicy.shtml. Accessed March 7, 2023.

35.

Kourime M, Bryce J, Jiang J, Nixon R, Rodie M, Ahmed SF. An assessment of the quality of the I-DSD and the I-CAH registries - international registries for rare conditions affecting sex development. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2017;12(1):56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-017-0603-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Coi A, Santoro M, Villaverde-Hueso A, Lipucci Di Paola M, Gainotti S, Taruscio D, et al. The quality of Rare Disease registries: evaluation and characterization. Public Health Genomics. 2016;19(2):108–15. https://doi.org/10.1159/000444476.

37.

Mordenti M, Boarini M, D’Alessandro F, Pedrini E, Locatelli M, Sangiorgi L. Remodeling an existing rare disease registry to be used in regulatory context: lessons learned and recommendations. Front Pharmacol. 2022;13(no pagination). https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2022.966081.

38.

Ali SR, Bryce J, Kodra Y, Taruscio D, Persani L, Ahmed SF. The Quality evaluation of Rare Disease Registries-An Assessment of the essential features of a Disease Registry. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(22). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182211968.

39.

Maruf N, Chanchu G. Planning a rare disease registry (2022). https://orphan-reach.com/planning-a-rare-disease-registry/. Accessed September 29, 2023.

40.

Hessl D, Rosselot H, Miller R, Espinal G, Famula J, Sherman SL, et al. The International Fragile X Premutation Registry: building a resource for research and clinical trial readiness. J Med Genet. 2022;59(12):1165–70. https://doi.org/10.1136/jmedgenet-2022-108568.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Vitale A, Della Casa F, Lopalco G, Pereira RM, Ruscitti P, Giacomelli R, et al. Development and implementation of the AIDA International Registry for patients with still’s disease. Front Med. 2022;9:878797. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.878797.CrossRef

42.

Stanimirovic D, Murko E, Battelino T, Groselj U. Development of a pilot rare disease registry: a focus group study of initial steps towards the establishment of a rare disease ecosystem in Slovenia. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019;14(1):172. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-019-1146-x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

Kinsner-Ovaskainen A, Lanzoni M, Garne E, Loane M, Morris J, Neville A, et al. A sustainable solution for the activities of the European network for surveillance of congenital anomalies: EUROCAT as part of the EU platform on Rare diseases Registration. Eur J Med Genet. 2018;61(9):513–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmg.2018.03.008.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Pericleous M, Kelly C, Schilsky M, Dhawan A, Ala A. Defining and characterising a toolkit for the development of a successful European registry for rare liver diseases: a model for building a rare disease registry. Clin Med J Royal Coll Physicians Lond. 2022;22(4). https://doi.org/10.7861/CLINMED.2021-0725.

45.

European Medicines Agency: Guideline on registry-based studies. (2021). https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-registry-based-studies_en-0.pdf. Accessed March 7, 2023.

46.

Bellgard MI, Snelling T, McGree JM. RD-RAP: beyond rare disease patient registries, devising a comprehensive data and analytic framework. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019;14(1):176. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-019-1139-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

47.

Isaacman D, Iliach O, Keefer J, Campion DM, Kelly B. Registries for rare diseases: a foundation for multi-arm, multi-company trials. (2019). https://www.iqvia.com/library/white-papers/registries-for-rare-diseases.

48.

Chorostowska-Wynimko J, Wencker M, Horvath I. The importance of effective registries in pulmonary diseases and how to optimize their output. Chronic Resp Dis. 2019;16:1479973119881777. https://doi.org/10.1177/1479973119881777.CrossRef

49.

Liu P, Gong M, Li J, Baynam G, Zhu W, Zhu Y, et al. Innovation in Informatics to Improve Clinical Care and Drug Accessibility for Rare diseases in China. Front Pharmacol. 2021;12:719415. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2021.719415.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

50.

EUCERD: EUCERD Core Recommendations on Rare Disease Patient Registration and Data Collection. (2013). http://www.rd-action.eu/eucerd/EUCERD_Recommendations/EUCERD_Recommendations_RDRegistryDataCollection_adopted.pdf. Accessed September 28, 2023.

51.

Bellgard MI, Macgregor A, Janon F, Harvey A, O’Leary P, Hunter A, et al. A modular approach to disease registry design: successful adoption of an internet-based rare disease registry. Hum Mutat. 2012;33(10):E2356–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/humu.22154.CrossRefPubMed

52.

Garcia M, Downs J, Russell A, Wang W. Impact of biobanks on research outcomes in rare diseases: a systematic review. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2018;13(1):202. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-018-0942-z.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

53.

EURORDIS-NORD-CORD:, EURORDIS-NORD-CORD Joint Declaration of 10 Key Principles for Rare Disease Patient Registries. (2012). https://download2.eurordis.org/documents/pdf/EURORDIS_NORD_CORD_JointDec_Registries_FINAL.pdf. Accessed September 28, 2023.

54.

Marques JP, Vaz-Pereira S, Costa J, Marta A, Henriques J, Silva R. Challenges, facilitators and barriers to the adoption and use of a web-based national IRD registry: lessons learned from the IRD-PT registry. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2022;17(1):323. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-022-02489-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

55.

Hageman IC, van der Steeg HJJ, Jenetzky E, Trajanovska M, King SK, de Blaauw I, et al. A Quality Assessment of the ARM-Net Registry Design and Data Collection. J Pediatr Surg. 2023;25:25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2023.02.049.CrossRef

56.

Kaliyaperumal R, Wilkinson MD, Moreno PA, Benis N, Cornet R, Dos Santos Vieira B, et al. Semantic modelling of common data elements for rare disease registries, and a prototype workflow for their deployment over registry data. J Biomedical Semant. 2022;13(1):9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13326-022-00264-6.CrossRef

57.

European Commission. Principles of the GDPR. https://commission.europa.eu/law/law-topic/data-protection/reform/rules-business-and-organisations/principles-gdpr_en.

58.

Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. PIPEDA in brief. https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/privacy-topics/privacy-laws-in-canada/the-personal-information-protection-and-electronic-documents-act-pipeda/pipeda_brief/ (2019).

59.

Bettio C, Salsi V, Orsini M, Calanchi E, Magnotta L, Gagliardelli L, et al. The Italian National Registry for FSHD: an enhanced data integration and an analytics framework towards Smart Health Care and Precision Medicine for a rare disease. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2021;16(1):470. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-021-02100-z.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

60.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. : Rare Disease Registry Program, Data Ownership https://registries.ncats.nih.gov/glossary/data-ownership/.

61.

Deserno TM, Haak D, Brandenburg V, Deserno V, Classen C, Specht P. Integrated image data and medical record management for rare disease registries. A general framework and its instantiation to theGerman Calciphylaxis Registry. J Digit Imaging. 2014;27(6):702–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-014-9698-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

62.

Blumenthal S, The, NQRN Registry Maturational Framework: Evaluating the Capability and Use of Clinical Registries. EGEMS, Washington. DC). 2019;7(1):29. https://doi.org/10.5334/egems.278.

63.

Lautenschlager R, Kohlmayer F, Prasser F, Kuhn KA. A generic solution for web-based management of pseudonymized data. BMC Med Inf Decis Mak. 2015;15:100. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-015-0222-y.CrossRef

64.

DAMA U.K. Working Group: The Six Primary Dimensions For Data Quality Assessment, Defining Data Quality Dimensions. (2013). https://www.sbctc.edu/resources/documents/colleges-staff/commissions-councils/dgc/data-quality-deminsions.pdf. Accessed September 28, 2023.

65.

McGlinn K, Rutherford MA, Gisslander K, Hederman L, Little MA, O’Sullivan D. FAIRVASC: a semantic web approach to rare disease registry integration. Comput Biol Med. 2022;145:105313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2022.105313.CrossRefPubMed

66.

Song P, He J, Li F, Jin C. Innovative measures to combat rare diseases in China: the national rare diseases registry system, larger-scale clinical cohort studies, and studies in combination with precision medicine research. Intractable rare Dis Res. 2017;6(1):1–5. https://doi.org/10.5582/irdr.2017.01003.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

67.

Sernadela P, Gonzalez-Castro L, Carta C, van der Horst E, Lopes P, Kaliyaperumal R, et al. Linked registries: connecting Rare diseases patient registries through a semantic web layer. Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:8327980. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/8327980.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

68.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Real-World Data: Assessing Registries to Support Regulatory Decision-Making for Drug and Biological Products Guidance for Industry: Draft Guidance (2021). https://www.regulations.gov/document/FDA-2021-D-1146-0041. Accessed August 15, 2023.

69.

Santoro M, Coi A, Di Lipucci M, Bianucci AM, Gainotti S, Mollo E, et al. Rare disease registries classification and characterization: a data mining approach. Public Health Genomics. 2015;18(2):113–22. https://doi.org/10.1159/000369993.CrossRefPubMed

70.

Daneshvari S, Youssof S, Kroth PJ. The NIH Office of Rare Diseases Research patient registry Standard: a report from the University of New Mexico’s Oculopharyngeal muscular dystrophy patient Registry. AMIA Annual Symp Proc AMIA Symp. 2013;2013:269–77.

71.

Rubinstein YR, McInnes P, NIH/NCATS/GRDR. Contemp Clin Trials. 2015;42:78–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2015.03.003. R Common Data Elements: A leading force for standardized data collection.

72.

Bellgard MI, Render L, Radochonski M, Hunter A. Second generation registry framework. Source Code Biol Med. 2014;9:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1751-0473-9-14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

73.

Choquet R, Maaroufi M, de Carrara A, Messiaen C, Luigi E, Landais P. J Am Med Inf Association: JAMIA. 2015;22(1):76–85. https://doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2014-002794. A methodology for a minimum data set for rare diseases to support national centers of excellence for healthcare and research.

74.

Mullin AP, Corey D, Turner EC, Liwski R, Olson D, Burton J, et al. Standardized data structures in Rare diseases: CDISC user Guides for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy and Huntington’s Disease. Clin Transl Sci. 2021;14(1):214–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/cts.12845.CrossRefPubMed

75.

Groenen KHJ, Jacobsen A, Kersloot MG, Dos Santos Vieira B, van Enckevort E, Kaliyaperumal R, et al. The de novo FAIRification process of a registry for vascular anomalies. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2021;16(1):376. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-021-02004-y.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

76.

Taruscio D, Mollo E, Gainotti S, Posada de la Paz M, Bianchi F, Vittozzi L. Archives public health = Archives belges de sante publique. 2014;72(1):35. https://doi.org/10.1186/2049-3258-72-35. The EPIRARE proposal of a set of indicators and common data elements for the European platform for rare disease registration.

77.

Roos M, Lopez Martin E, Wilkinson MD. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2017;1031:165–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67144-4_9. Preparing Data at the Source to Foster Interoperability across Rare Disease Resources.

78.

Ahern S, Sims G, Earnest A, Bell C. Optimism, opportunities, outcomes: the Australian cystic Fibrosis Data Registry. Intern Med J. 2018;48(6):721–3. https://doi.org/10.1111/imj.13807.CrossRefPubMed

79.

Maaroufi M, Choquet R, Landais P, Jaulent M-C. Towards data integration automation for the French rare disease registry. AMIA Annual Symposium proceedings AMIA Symposium. 2015;2015:880-5.

80.

Bellgard MI, Sleeman MW, Guerrero FD, Fletcher S, Baynam G, Goldblatt J, et al. Rare Disease Research Roadmap: navigating the bioinformatics and translational challenges for improved patient health outcomes. Health Policy Technol. 2014;3(4):325–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2014.08.007.CrossRef

81.

Bellgard M, Beroud C, Parkinson K, Harris T, Ayme S, Baynam G, et al. Dispelling myths about rare disease registry system development. Source Code Biol Med. 2013;8(1):21. https://doi.org/10.1186/1751-0473-8-21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

82.

Vasseur J, Zieschank A, Gobel J, Schaaf J, Dahmer-Heath M, Konig J, et al. Development of an interactive dashboard for OSSE Rare Disease registries. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2022;293:187–8. https://doi.org/10.3233/SHTI220367.CrossRefPubMed

83.

Amselem S, Gueguen S, Weinbach J, Clement A, Landais P. RaDiCo, the French national research program on rare disease cohorts. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2021;16(1):454. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-021-02089-5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

84.

Hooshafza S, Mc Quaid L, Stephens G, Flynn R, O’Connor L. Development of a framework to assess the quality of data sources in healthcare settings. J Am Med Inf Assoc. 2022;29(5):944–52. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocac017.CrossRef

85.

European Reference Network. ERN-RND Registry. https://www.ern-rnd.eu/ern-rnd-registry/#registry-objectives Accessed February 14, 2024.

86.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Real-World Data: Assessing Registries To Support Regulatory Decision-Making for Drug and Biological Products. Final (2023). https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/real-world-data-assessing-registries-support-regulatory-decision-making-drug-and-biological-products. Accessed April 4, 2024.

87.

Canada’s Drug and Health Technology Agency (cadth): Guidance for Reporting Real-World Evidence. (2023). https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/RWE/MG0020/MG0020-RWE-Guidance-Report-Secured.pdf. Accessed November 16, 2023.

88.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE): NICE Real-World Evidence Framework. (2022). https://www.nice.org.uk/corporate/ecd9/resources/nice-realworld-evidence-framework-pdf-1124020816837. Accessed November 16, 2023.

89.

Government of Canada. Government of Canada improves access to affordable and effective drugs for rare diseases. https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/news/2023/03/government-of-canada-improves-access-to-affordable-and-effective-drugs-for-rare-diseases.html (2023).

90.

Public Health Agency of Canada: Moving Forward on a Pan-Canadian Health Data Strategy. (2022). https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/programs/pan-canadian-health-data-strategy.html. Accessed November 16, 2023.

91.

European Commission: European Platform on Rare Disease Registration (EU RD Platform). https://eu-rd-platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/_en Accessed February 9, 024.

92.

European Commission. European Rare Disease Registry Infrastructure (ERDRI). https://eu-rd-platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/erdri-description_en Accessed February 14, 2024.

93.

European Commission. Set of Common Data Elements. https://eu-rd-platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/set-of-common-data-elements_en Accessed February 14, 2024.

94.

Abaza H, Kadioglu D, Martin S, Papadopoulou A, Dos Santos Vieira B, Schaefer F, et al. JMIR Med Inf. 2022;10(5):e32158. https://doi.org/10.2196/32158. Domain-Specific Common Data Elements for Rare Disease Registration: Conceptual Approach of a European Joint Initiative Toward Semantic Interoperability in Rare Disease Research.

95.

O’Neill J, Tabish H, Welch V, Petticrew M, Pottie K, Clarke M, et al. Applying an equity lens to interventions: using PROGRESS ensures consideration of socially stratifying factors to illuminate inequities in health. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(1):56–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.08.005.CrossRefPubMed

96.

Oehrlein EM, Schoch S, Burcu M, McBeth JF, Bright J, Pashos CL, et al. Developing patient-centered real-world evidence: emerging methods recommendations from a Consensus process. Value Health. 2023;26(1):28–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2022.04.1738.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Scoping review of the recommendations and guidance for improving the quality of rare disease registries
Authors: JE Tarride
A. Okoh
K. Aryal
C. Prada
Deborah Milinkovic
A. Keepanasseril
A. Iorio
Publication date: 01-12-2024
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases / Issue 1/2024
Electronic ISSN: 1750-1172
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-024-03193-y

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Scoping review of the recommendations and guidance for improving the quality of rare disease registries

Abstract

Background

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

Analysis of caregiver perspectives on patients with mucopolysaccharidosis II treated with pabinafusp alfa: results of qualitative interviews in Japan

COLQ-Congenital myasthenic syndrome in an Iranian cohort: the clinical and genetics spectrum

An algorithm to identify patients aged 0–3 with rare genetic disorders

Long-term outcome and fertility results of intraplacental choriocarcinoma: a retrospective study of 14 patients and literature review

Genetic analysis of 37 cases with primary periodic paralysis in Chinese patients

A systematic review on the birth prevalence of metachromatic leukodystrophy