Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Economic Analysis of Centralized vs. Decentralized Electronic Data Capture in Multi-Center Clinical Studies
View through CrossRef
Background: New data management models are emerging in multi-center clinical studies. We evaluated the incremental costs associated with decentralized vs. centralized models. Methods: We developed clinical research network economic models to evaluate three data management models: centralized, decentralized with local software, and decentralized with shared database. Descriptive information from three clinical research studies served as inputs for these models. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was total data management costs. Secondary outcomes included: data management costs for sites, local data centers, and central coordinating centers. Results: Both decentralized models were more costly than the centralized model for each clinical research study: the decentralized with local software model was the most expensive. Decreasing the number of local data centers and case book pages reduced cost differentials between models. Conclusion: Decentralized vs. centralized data management in multi-center clinical research studies is associated with increases in data management costs.
Title: Economic Analysis of Centralized vs. Decentralized Electronic Data Capture in Multi-Center Clinical Studies
Description:
Background: New data management models are emerging in multi-center clinical studies.
We evaluated the incremental costs associated with decentralized vs.
centralized models.
Methods: We developed clinical research network economic models to evaluate three data management models: centralized, decentralized with local software, and decentralized with shared database.
Descriptive information from three clinical research studies served as inputs for these models.
Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was total data management costs.
Secondary outcomes included: data management costs for sites, local data centers, and central coordinating centers.
Results: Both decentralized models were more costly than the centralized model for each clinical research study: the decentralized with local software model was the most expensive.
Decreasing the number of local data centers and case book pages reduced cost differentials between models.
Conclusion: Decentralized vs.
centralized data management in multi-center clinical research studies is associated with increases in data management costs.
Related Results
Macroeconomic and Social Precursors of Suicide Rates in the Philippines: A Quantitative Analysis (Preprint)
Macroeconomic and Social Precursors of Suicide Rates in the Philippines: A Quantitative Analysis (Preprint)
BACKGROUND
Suicide is a complex, serious and multifaceted public health issue that poses significant challenges to societies worldwide. In fact, it represen...
Validation of the Oral Survey-B System for Electronic Data Capture in National Oral Health Surveys
Validation of the Oral Survey-B System for Electronic Data Capture in National Oral Health Surveys
The aims of the present study were to incorporate and to validate the electronic capture of participant-related outcomes into the Oral Survey-B System, which was originally develop...
Platonic Relations
Platonic Relations
The loop is one of the primary means of structuration for electronic music from mainstream to avant-garde styles. Indeed, during forums at the recent 2002 AD Analogue 2 Digital eve...
Centralized and Decentralized Warehouse Logistics Collaboration, Extended Version
Centralized and Decentralized Warehouse Logistics Collaboration, Extended Version
We bound the value of collaboration in a decentralized multi-supplier multi-retailer setting, where several suppliers ship to several retailers through a shared warehouse, and outb...
Digital transformation of clinical research: facilitating decentralized clinical trials in India
Digital transformation of clinical research: facilitating decentralized clinical trials in India
The decentralized clinical trials make clinical research accessible by using digital tools such as e-consent, telehealth, and remote monitoring. Decentralized clinical trials in In...
Small Cell Lung Cancer and Tarlatamab: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
Small Cell Lung Cancer and Tarlatamab: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
Abstract
Introduction
Tarlatamab is a Delta-like ligand 3 (DLL3) -directed bispecific T-cell engager recently approved for use in patients with advanced small cell lung cancer (SCL...
CADP: Towards Better Centralized Learning for Decentralized Execution in MARL
CADP: Towards Better Centralized Learning for Decentralized Execution in MARL
Centralized Training with Decentralized Execution (CTDE) has recently emerged as a popular framework for cooperative Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL), where agents can use...
CADP: Towards Better Centralized Learning for Decentralized Execution in MARL
CADP: Towards Better Centralized Learning for Decentralized Execution in MARL
Centralized Training with Decentralized Execution (CTDE) has recently emerged as a popular framework for cooperative Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL), where agents can use...

