ArticleTrials2026
Impact of using routine healthcare data on the efficiency of implementation trials: a qualitative comparative case study.
Article in Trials, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRandomised implementation trials evaluate the effects of implementation strategies on implementation outcomes and may also monitor clinical effectiveness. Routine healthcare data are used in implementation trials for participant identification, intervention delivery, and/or outcome ascertainment. Trial efficiency (scientific, operational, statistical, and economic) is operationalised across trial design, processes, superstructure, infrastructure, and stakeholder engagement (the Trial Efficiency Pentagon). Despite frequent usage, the contribution of routine data to implementation trial efficiency remains underexplored. We aimed to investigate how the use of routine healthcare data affects trial efficiency in two implementation trials.
methodsWe conducted a qualitative comparative case study of two implementation trials, one UK-based and one US-based. Participants were purposively sampled from trial teams involved in the use and management of routine healthcare data. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, document analysis, and feedback workshops. Framework analysis guided by the Trial Efficiency Pentagon was used to analyse the data, and data flow diagrams were developed to visualise routine data pathways within each trial.
resultsThe two trials (DIGITS and IMP
conclusionsRoutine data has an impact on implementation trial efficiency across trial design, processes, superstructure, infrastructure, and stakeholder engagement. To improve trial efficiency in public healthcare systems, researchers must address technological and regulatory barriers to accessing data. In private healthcare systems, data use and access hinges on investing in robust IT infrastructure and ensuring comprehensive organisational commitment.
trial registrationIMP
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.