ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Linking clinical trial data with real-world data for enhanced clinical evidence generation: methodological considerations and recommendations.
Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Practical Guide to Implementing Real-World Evidence as Primary Basis for Approval and Label Expansion.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) remain the cornerstone of causal inference on the safety and efficacy of medicinal products. But their limited follow-up, controlled settings, and narrowly defined data collection to balance the burden to patients and maintain study feasibility often results in unaddressed important questions for health authorities and other clinical decision makers. Linkage of RCT data to routinely collected health data [real-world data (RWD)] offers a mechanism for addressing these gaps by extending observations and outcomes assessment into routine practice. This paper synthesizes methodological and operational considerations for RCTs with RWD linkage, drawing on deterministic, probabilistic, referential, and privacy-preserving record linkage methodologies and on four case studies that span different indications and regional settings: a long-term follow-up of a human papillomavirus vaccine trial using deterministic linkage via universal Personal Identity Numbers; a U.S. linkage of a respiratory syncytial virus vaccine trial to administrative health claims using privacy-preserving tokenization; and two transcatheter aortic valve replacement trials linked to Medicare claims to reproduce randomized treatment-effect estimates and to assess transportability to the broader Medicare population. We offer actionable methodological considerations and recommendations, drawing on the case studies and the broader linkage literature. Progress beyond the current state will require global health authority guidance specific to linking clinical trials with routinely collected data, shared benchmarks for evaluating linkage approaches, routine reporting and assessments of impact of use cases on regulatory and reimbursement decisions. Linkage of clinical trial data with routinely collected data sources can meaningfully accelerate clinical development and inform health authority and other clinical decision making.
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.