Cited by 45Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsEthics in Clinical ResearchPharmaceutical industry and healthcare

The other side of clinical trial monitoring; assuring data quality and procedural adherence

Williams, George W·2006·Clinical Trials

Abstract

BackgroundData monitoring can mean different things. It can mean statistical methodologies for clinical trial monitoring, interim data analysis, monitoring for quality control or assurance or safety reporting to regulatory agencies. PurposeThe various facets of data monitoring will be discussed and reviewed from primarily an industry perspective. MethodsBy careful attention to the design and conduct of a clinical trial, the expense of monitoring can be markedly reduced. Careful attention should be given to the qualifications of investigators in the selection of clinical sites and central facilities. Site personnel must be adequately trained. The sponsor should utilize appropriately qualified individuals to supervise the overall conduct of the trial. The monitor should visit the investigator at the site of the investigation frequently enough to ensure acceptable quality. The monitor is responsible for inspecting the case report forms at regular intervals. Quality control should be applied to each stage of data handling to ensure that all data are reliable and have been processed correctly. The auditor will assess whether the site is being monitored in accordance with the monitoring plan. The determination of the extent and nature of monitoring should be based on considerations such as the objective, design and complexity of the trial. Statistical sampling may be an acceptable method for selecting the data to be verified. The monitor should ensure that adverse events are reported. Study data will be monitored on an ongoing basis to ensure patient safety. The sponsor may utilize a Data Monitoring Committee to protect the validity of a trial. ConclusionsDiscussions between industry, academia and regulatory groups regarding the optimal extent and methods for monitoring of clinical trials are encouraged.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1740774506073104

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Standard processes are often implemented by local study staff to enhance data quality and reduce bias by detecting and reducing missing or incomplete data, inaccuracies, and excessive variability in measurements.

    “Standard processes are often implemented by local study staff to enhance data quality and reduce bias by detecting and reducing the amount of missing or incomplete data, inaccuracies, and excessive variability in measurements.390”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Williams, G. W.
Affiliations
Amgen (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Williams, George W
Venue
Clinical Trials
Published
2006-12
Volume
3
Issue
6
Pages
530-537
ISSN
  • 1740-7745 (ISSN-L)
  • 1740-7753
OpenAlex
W2035489083
Cited by
45
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
FWCI
0.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Trials (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
Keywords
clinical trial monitoring, data quality, procedural adherence, data monitoring committees, investigator qualifications, site selection, quality control, adverse event reporting, patient safety, regulatory compliance
MeSH terms
Decision Making, Humans, Quality Control, Research Design, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems, Risk Assessment, Patient Selection, Clinical Trials Data Monitoring Committees

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