Guidelines for Data Acquisition, Quality and Curation for Observational Research Designs (DAQCORD)

Background: High-quality data are critical to the entire scientific enterprise, yet the complexity and effort involved in data curation are vastly under-appreciated. This is especially true for large observational, clinical studies because of the amount of multimodal data that is captured and the opportunity for addressing numerous research questions through analysis, either alone or in combination with other data sets. However, a lack of details concerning data curation methods can result in unresolved questions about the robustness of the data, its utility for addressing specific research questions or hypotheses and how to interpret the results. We aimed to develop a framework for the design, documentation and reporting of data curation methods in order to advance the scientific rigour, reproducibility and analysis of the data. Methods: Forty-six experts participated in a modified Delphi process to reach consensus on indicators of data curation that could be used in the design and reporting of studies. Results: We identified 46 indicators that are applicable to the design, training/testing, run time and post-collection phases of studies. Conclusion: The Data Acquisition, Quality and Curation for Observational Research Designs (DAQCORD) Guidelines are the first comprehensive set of data quality indicators for large observational studies. They were developed around the needs of neuroscience projects, but we believe they are relevant and generalisable, in whole or in part, to other fields of health research, and also to smaller observational studies and preclinical research. The DAQCORD Guidelines provide a framework for achieving high-quality data; a cornerstone of health research.

[1]  S. Lewis,et al.  Guidelines for the Content of Statistical Analysis Plans in Clinical Trials , 2017, JAMA.

[2]  J. V. van Delden,et al.  Definition and recommendations for advance care planning: an international consensus supported by the European Association for Palliative Care. , 2017, The Lancet. Oncology.

[3]  Hester F. Lingsma,et al.  Development of a quality indicator set to measure and improve quality of ICU care for patients with traumatic brain injury , 2019, Critical Care.

[4]  Steven G. Johnson,et al.  A Harmonized Data Quality Assessment Terminology and Framework for the Secondary Use of Electronic Health Record Data , 2016, EGEMS.

[5]  S. Bakken,et al.  A Data Quality Assessment Guideline for Electronic Health Record Data Reuse , 2017, EGEMS.

[6]  David Moher,et al.  The REporting of Studies Conducted Using Observational Routinely-Collected Health Data (RECORD) Statement: Methods for Arriving at Consensus and Developing Reporting Guidelines , 2015, PloS one.

[7]  Dong Joon Lee,et al.  Practices of research data curation in institutional repositories: A qualitative view from repository staff , 2017, PloS one.

[8]  S. Pocock,et al.  The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. , 2007, Preventive medicine.

[9]  W. Koroshetz,et al.  Toward an international initiative for traumatic brain injury research. , 2013, Journal of neurotrauma.

[10]  David Moher,et al.  Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies: The PRISMA-DTA Statement , 2018, JAMA.

[11]  Chunhua Weng,et al.  Methods and dimensions of electronic health record data quality assessment: enabling reuse for clinical research , 2013, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[12]  I. Simera EQUATOR Network collates resources for good research , 2008, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[13]  Fiona Lecky,et al.  Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI): a prospective longitudinal observational study. , 2015, Neurosurgery.

[14]  Andrea Remuzzi,et al.  Case Report: Developing Regulatory-compliant Electronic Case Report Forms for Clinical Trials: Experience with The Demand Trial , 2009, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[15]  Patrick B. Ryan,et al.  Transparent Reporting of Data Quality in Distributed Data Networks , 2015, EGEMS.

[16]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Scanning the horizon: towards transparent and reproducible neuroimaging research , 2016, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[17]  C. Kruse,et al.  Challenges and Opportunities of Big Data in Health Care: A Systematic Review , 2016, JMIR medical informatics.

[18]  Ryuzo Kawamori,et al.  Importance of observational studies in clinical practice. , 2007, Clinical therapeutics.

[19]  Zhen Hua Liu,et al.  Big data management challenges in health research - a literature review , 2019, Briefings Bioinform..