Cited by 124Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsEthics in Clinical ResearchGenomics and Rare Diseases

Establishing Patient Registries for Rare Diseases: Rationale and Challenges

Open access
Boulanger, Vanessa, Schlemmer, Marissa, Rossov, Suzanne, Seebald, Allison, Gavin, Pamela·2020·Pharmaceutical Medicine

Abstract

Globally, an estimated 350 million people are affected by a rare disease diagnosis. Knowledge limitations persist for the majority of rare conditions due to systemic and structural challenges in healthcare and research. Disease-specific patient populations are often small and geographically dispersed; funding support for research is restricted; and diagnostic delays are common due to disease complexities, limited medical training for practitioners, and evolving foundational knowledge related to disease characterization. Patient registries can be effective, convenient, and cost-efficient tools to support documentation of the natural history of a disease, centering patients as research partners in the process while uniting rare communities around a common initiative. Current global trends towards innovative and patient-centered healthcare are enabling patient registries to increasingly emerge as valuable tools for use within rare disease research and drug development. This article describes the value of and rationale for establishing rare disease patient registries and the considerations and challenges that stakeholders, such as researchers, industry, health care providers, and patient community organizations, may encounter.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40290-020-00332-1

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Delayed diagnosis, emotional, and gender assignment problems negatively influence quality of life.

    “Delayed diagnosis (557,734), emotional (731), and gender assignment problems (732,735) negatively influence quality of life (560,736).”

    From Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia—Current Insights in Pathophysiology, Diagnostics, and Management (2022) · cites this paper as [734]

    The section on clinical-trial design mentions diagnostic delays, but does not link them to quality of life. Searches for quality of life, emotional problems, and gender assignment found no passage in our copy addressing the claimed effects. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. [1]Slade A Isa F Kyte D Pankhurst T Kerecuk L Lipkin G Calvert M Patient reported outcome measures in rare diseases: a narrative review Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2018 13 1 61 10.1186/s13023-018-0810-x 29688860 PMC5914068 · DOI
  2. [2]Groft SC Rare diseases research: expanding collaborative translational research opportunities Chest. 2013 144 1 16 23 10.1378/chest.13-0606 23880676 PMC3707172 · DOI
  3. [4]Richter T Nestler-Parr S Babela R Khan ZM Tesoro T Molsen E Hughes DA International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Rare Disease Special Interest Groups Rare disease terminology and definitions—a systematic global review: report of the ISPOR Rare Disease Special Interest Group Value Health. 2015 18 906 914 10.1016/j.jval.2015.05.008 26409619 · DOI
  4. [5]Kaufmann P Pariser AR Austin C From scientific discovery to treatments for rare diseases—the view from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences—Office of Rare Diseases Research Orphanet J Rare Dis 2018 13 1 196 10.1186/s13023-018-0936-x 30400963 PMC6219030 · DOI
  5. [6]Gavin P The importance of natural histories for rare diseases Expert Opinion Orphan Drugs. 2015 3 355 357 10.1517/21678707.2015.1063415 · DOI
  6. [7]Kodra Y de la Paz MP Coi A Santoro M Bianchi F Ahmed F Rubinstein YR Weinbach J Taruscio D Data quality in rare diseases registries Adv Exp Med Biol. 2017 1031 149 164 10.1007/978-3-319-67144-4_8 29214570 · DOI
  7. [8]Maccarthy J Guerin S Wilson AG Dorris ER Facilitating public and patient involvement in basic and preclinical health research PLoS One. 2019 14 5 e0216600 10.1371/journal.pone.0216600 31086377 PMC6516642 · DOI
  8. [9]Fink AK Loeffler DR Marshall BC Gross CH Morgan WJ Data that empower: the success and promise of CF patient registries Pediatr Pulm. 2017 52 544 551 10.1002/ppul.23790 28910520 · DOI
  9. [10]Gliklich R, Dreyer N, Leavy M. Registries for evaluating patient outcomes: a user’s guide. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. 2014. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK208616/. Accessed 20 Feb 2020. 24945055
  10. [12]Martins AM Obikawa SK The importance of patient registries for rare diseases Expert Opinion Orphan Drugs. 2013 1 769 772 10.1517/21678707.2013.840584 · DOI
  11. [13]D’Agnolo HM Kievit W Andrade RJ Karlsen TH Wedemeyer H Drenth JP Creating an effective clinical registry for rare diseases United Eur Gastroenterol J. 2016 4 3 333 338 10.1177/2050640615618042 PMC4924439 27403298 · DOI
  12. [14]Tabor HK Goldenberg A What precision medicine can learn from rare genetic disease research and translation AMA J Ethics. 2018 20 9 834 840 10.1001/amajethics.2018.834 30242814 · DOI
  13. [20]Wise J de Barron AG Splendiani A Balali-Mood B Vasant D Little E Mellino G Harrow I Smith I Taubert J van Bochove K Romacker M Walgemoed P Jimenez RC Winnenburg R Plasterer T Gupta V Hedley V Implementation and relevance of FAIR data principles in biopharmaceutical R&D Drug Discov Today. 2019 24 4 933 938 10.1016/j.drudis.2019.01.008 30690198 · DOI
  14. [24]Chawla NV Davis DA Bringing big data to personalized healthcare: a patient-centered framework J Gen Intern Med. 2013 28 3 660 665 10.1007/s11606-013-2455-8 23797912 PMC3744281 · DOI · Paper page
  15. [25]O’Connor AM Llewellyn-Thomas HA Flood AB Modifying unwarranted variations in health care: shared decision making using patient decision aids Health Aff (Millwood). 2004 Suppl Variation 63 72 10.1377/hlthaff.var.63 15471770 · DOI
  16. [26]Ieva F Gale CP Sharples LD Contemporary roles of registries in clinical cardiology: when do we need randomized trials? Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2014 12 12 1383 1386 10.1586/14779072.2015.982096 25418756 · DOI
  17. [30]Flood J Minkler M Hennessey LS Estrada J Falbe J The collective impact model and its potential for health promotion: overview and case study of a healthy retail initiative in San Francisco Health Educ Behav. 2015 42 5 654 668 10.1177/1090198115577372 25810470 · DOI
  18. [33]Stoller JK The challenge of rare diseases Chest. 2018 153 6 1309 1314 10.1016/j.chest.2017.12.018 29325986 · DOI
  19. [35]Evangelista T Hedley V Atalaia A Johnson M Lynn S Le Cam Y Bushby K The context for the thematic grouping of rare diseases to facilitate the establishment of European Reference Networks Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2016 10.1186/s13023-016-0398-y 26911987 PMC4765230 · DOI
  20. [36]Bellgard M Beroud C Parkinson K Harris T Ayme S Baynam G Weeramanthri T Dawkins H Hunter A Dispelling myths about rare disease registry system development Source Code Biol Med. 2013 10.1186/1751-0473-8-21 24131574 PMC4015362 · DOI
  21. [37]Augustine EF Adams HR Mink JW Clinical trials in rare disease: challenges and opportunities J Child Neurol. 2013 28 9 1142 1150 10.1177/0883073813495959 24014509 PMC3964003 · DOI
  22. [38]Pannucci CJ Wilkins EG Identifying and avoiding bias in research Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 126 2 619 625 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181de24bc 20679844 PMC2917255 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Boulanger, V., Schlemmer, M., Rossov, S., Seebald, A., & Gavin, P.
Affiliations
National Organization for Rare Disorders (US)
Corresponding author
Boulanger, Vanessa
Venue
Pharmaceutical Medicine
Published
2020-03-25
Volume
34
Issue
3
Pages
185-190
ISSN
  • 0265-0673 (ISSN-L)
  • 1178-2595
  • 1179-1993
OpenAlex
W3013917401
Cited by
124
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1
FWCI
2.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Pharmaceutical Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (U18 FD 005320)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
Keywords
rare diseases, patient registry, natural history of disease, patient-oriented research, patient engagement, drug development, delayed diagnosis, research funding, stakeholder challenges
MeSH terms
Stakeholder Participation, Health Priorities, Humans, Registries, Research Design, Patient-Centered Care, Evidence-Based Medicine, Rare Diseases, Data Mining

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review