ArticleThe AAPS journal2025
Improvements in Data Quality Can Boost Efficiency and Reduce Development Costs: A Pharmacometric CRO's Perspective.
Article in The AAPS journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drug development can take up to 15 years, costing as much as $11 billion USD, and relies heavily on high-quality data. The goal of this investigation of contract research organizations (CROs) was to assess the impact of data management activities (such as curation, quality assessment and integration) on model-informed drug development (MIDD) deliverables. A survey was sent to a diverse sample of CROs, to evaluate their baseline experience with assessing the data quality of sponsor-provided data and the time required to create analysis-ready datasets. It was distributed to 44 colleagues from 32 companies offering pharmacometrics services, including data management. The survey included 11 questions; 9 were multiple choice and 2 open-ended. Responses were gathered anonymously to ensure confidentiality and intellectual property protection and later shared with all participants. Of the 17 survey respondents, most develop data specifications and create analysis-ready datasets. The majority (65%) said the data they received from sponsors was rarely (< 10%) immediately usable due to improper formatting and quality issues like missing data and inconsistencies. Over 50% cited lack of definition/specifications as the primary reason. Assuming an average programming cost of $250/hour, cleaning client data takes CROs 3 to 24 h, costing between $750 and $6000 per dataset. Significant time is spent on rectifying poor-quality data. Automated data quality assessments can improve efficiency checks, though automation alone cannot resolve all quality issues. Better communication, collaboration, and systematic approaches to address data quality issues involving automation and AI are essential to further improve data quality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41350485What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.