4.5 Review

A common data language for clinical research studies: the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and American Academy for Cerebral Palsy and Developmental Medicine Cerebral Palsy Common Data Elements Version 1.0 recommendations

Journal

DEVELOPMENTAL MEDICINE AND CHILD NEUROLOGY
Volume 60, Issue 10, Pages 976-+

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/dmcn.13723

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [HHSN271201200034C]
  2. NeuroDevNet & Child and Family Research Institute Postdoctoral Fellowship Award

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To increase the efficiency and effectiveness of clinical research studies, cerebral palsy (CP) specific Common Data Elements (CDEs) were developed through a partnership between the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) and the American Academy of Cerebral Palsy and Developmental Medicine (AACPDM). International experts reviewed existing NINDS CDEs and tools used in studies of children and young people with CP. CDEs were compiled, subjected to internal review, and posted online for external public comment in September 2016. Guided by the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health framework, CDEs were categorized into six domains: (1) participant characteristics; (2) health, growth, and genetics; (3) neuroimaging; (4) neuromotor skills and functional assessments; (5) neurocognitive, social, and emotional assessments; and (6) engagement and quality of life. Version 1.0 of the NINDS/AACPDM CDEs for CP is publicly available on the NINDS CDE and AACPDM websites. Global use of CDEs for CP will standardize data collection, improve data quality, and facilitate comparisons across studies. Ongoing collaboration with international colleagues, industry, and people with CP and their families will provide meaningful feedback and updates as additional evidence is obtained. These CDEs are recommended for NINDS-funded research for CP.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available