4.3 Article

Multiple sclerosis registries in Europe - results of a systematic survey

期刊

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL
卷 20, 期 11, 页码 1523-1532

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1352458514528760

关键词

Multiple sclerosis; registries; Europe

资金

  1. European Union
  2. Almirall
  3. Bayer Pharma AG
  4. Biogen Idec
  5. ECTRIMS
  6. GSK
  7. F. Hoffmann La Roche
  8. Genzyme
  9. Medtronic Foundation
  10. Merck-Serono
  11. Coloplast
  12. Novartis
  13. Teva
  14. ESRC [ES/L007444/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  15. MRC [MR/K006525/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  16. Economic and Social Research Council [ES/L007444/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  17. Medical Research Council [MR/K006525/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Identification of MS registries and databases that are currently in use in Europe as well as a detailed knowledge of their content and structure is important in order to facilitate comprehensive analysis and comparison of data. Methods: National MS registries or databases were identified by literature search, from the results of the MS Barometer 2011 and by asking 33 national MS societies. A standardized questionnaire was developed and sent to the registries' leaders, followed by telephone interviews with them. Results: Twenty registries were identified, with 13 completing the questionnaire and seven being interviewed by telephone. These registries differed widely for objectives, structure, collected data, and for patients and centres included. Despite this heterogeneity, common objectives of the registries were epidemiology (n=10), long-term therapy outcome (n=8), healthcare research (n=9) and support/basis for clinical trials (n=8). While physician-based outcome measures (EDSS) are used in all registries, data from patients' perspectives were only collected in six registries. Conclusions: The detailed information on a large number of national MS registries in Europe is a prerequisite to facilitating harmonized integration of existing data from MS registries and databases, as well as comprehensive analyses and comparison across European populations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据