Assessment of a demonstrator repository for individual clinical trial data built upon DSpace [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]

Background: Given the increasing number and heterogeneity of data repositories, an improvement and harmonisation of practice within repositories for clinical trial data is urgently needed. The objective of the study was to develop and evaluate a demonstrator repository, using a widely used repositor...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Birol Tilki, Thomas Schulenberg, Steve Canham, Rita Banzi, Wolfgang Kuchinke, Christian Ohmann
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: F1000 Research Ltd 2020-06-01
Series:F1000Research
Online Access:https://f1000research.com/articles/9-311/v2
id doaj-5642d96392de42edbf1ceeb0caead361
record_format Article
spelling doaj-5642d96392de42edbf1ceeb0caead3612020-11-25T02:50:36ZengF1000 Research LtdF1000Research2046-14022020-06-01910.12688/f1000research.23468.227604Assessment of a demonstrator repository for individual clinical trial data built upon DSpace [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]Birol Tilki0Thomas Schulenberg1Steve Canham2Rita Banzi3Wolfgang Kuchinke4Christian Ohmann5Coordination Centre for Clinical Trials, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Nordrhine-Westfalia, 40225, GermanyCoordination Centre for Clinical Trials, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Nordrhine-Westfalia, 40225, GermanyEuropean Clinical Research Infrastructure Network, ECRIN, Redhill, Surrey, RH1 6QH, UKIstituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri, IRCCS, Milan, 20156, ItalyCoordination Centre for Clinical Trials, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Nordrhine-Westfalia, 40225, GermanyEuropean Clinical Research Infrastructure Network, ECRIN, Düsseldorf, Nordrhine-Westfalia, 40477, GermanyBackground: Given the increasing number and heterogeneity of data repositories, an improvement and harmonisation of practice within repositories for clinical trial data is urgently needed. The objective of the study was to develop and evaluate a demonstrator repository, using a widely used repository system (DSpace), and then explore its suitability for providing access to individual participant data (IPD) from clinical research. Methods: After a study of the available options, DSpace (version 6.3) was selected as the software for developing a demonstrator implementation of a repository for clinical trial data. In total, 19 quality criteria were defined, using previous work assessing clinical data repositories as a guide, and the demonstrator implementation was then assessed with respect to those criteria. Results: Generally, the performance of the DSpace demonstrator repository in supporting sensitive personal data such as that from clinical trials was strong, with 14 requirements demonstrated (74%), including the necessary support for metadata and identifiers. Two requirements could not be demonstrated (the ability to include de-identification tools and the availabiltiy of a self-attestation system) and three requirements were only partially demonstrated (ability to provide links to de-identification tools and requirements, incorporation of a data transfer agreement in system workflow, and capability to offer managed access through application on a case by case basis). Conclusions: Technically, the system was able to support most of the pre-defined requirements, though there are areas where support could be improved. Of course, in a productive repository, appropriate policies and procedures would be needed to direct the use of the available technical features. A technical evaluation should therefore be seen as indicating a system’s potential, rather than being a definite assessment of its suitability. DSpace clearly has considerable potential in this context and appears a suitable base for further exploration of the issues around storing sensitive data.https://f1000research.com/articles/9-311/v2
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Birol Tilki
Thomas Schulenberg
Steve Canham
Rita Banzi
Wolfgang Kuchinke
Christian Ohmann
spellingShingle Birol Tilki
Thomas Schulenberg
Steve Canham
Rita Banzi
Wolfgang Kuchinke
Christian Ohmann
Assessment of a demonstrator repository for individual clinical trial data built upon DSpace [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
F1000Research
author_facet Birol Tilki
Thomas Schulenberg
Steve Canham
Rita Banzi
Wolfgang Kuchinke
Christian Ohmann
author_sort Birol Tilki
title Assessment of a demonstrator repository for individual clinical trial data built upon DSpace [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
title_short Assessment of a demonstrator repository for individual clinical trial data built upon DSpace [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
title_full Assessment of a demonstrator repository for individual clinical trial data built upon DSpace [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
title_fullStr Assessment of a demonstrator repository for individual clinical trial data built upon DSpace [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of a demonstrator repository for individual clinical trial data built upon DSpace [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
title_sort assessment of a demonstrator repository for individual clinical trial data built upon dspace [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
publisher F1000 Research Ltd
series F1000Research
issn 2046-1402
publishDate 2020-06-01
description Background: Given the increasing number and heterogeneity of data repositories, an improvement and harmonisation of practice within repositories for clinical trial data is urgently needed. The objective of the study was to develop and evaluate a demonstrator repository, using a widely used repository system (DSpace), and then explore its suitability for providing access to individual participant data (IPD) from clinical research. Methods: After a study of the available options, DSpace (version 6.3) was selected as the software for developing a demonstrator implementation of a repository for clinical trial data. In total, 19 quality criteria were defined, using previous work assessing clinical data repositories as a guide, and the demonstrator implementation was then assessed with respect to those criteria. Results: Generally, the performance of the DSpace demonstrator repository in supporting sensitive personal data such as that from clinical trials was strong, with 14 requirements demonstrated (74%), including the necessary support for metadata and identifiers. Two requirements could not be demonstrated (the ability to include de-identification tools and the availabiltiy of a self-attestation system) and three requirements were only partially demonstrated (ability to provide links to de-identification tools and requirements, incorporation of a data transfer agreement in system workflow, and capability to offer managed access through application on a case by case basis). Conclusions: Technically, the system was able to support most of the pre-defined requirements, though there are areas where support could be improved. Of course, in a productive repository, appropriate policies and procedures would be needed to direct the use of the available technical features. A technical evaluation should therefore be seen as indicating a system’s potential, rather than being a definite assessment of its suitability. DSpace clearly has considerable potential in this context and appears a suitable base for further exploration of the issues around storing sensitive data.
url https://f1000research.com/articles/9-311/v2
work_keys_str_mv AT biroltilki assessmentofademonstratorrepositoryforindividualclinicaltrialdatabuiltupondspaceversion2peerreview2approved
AT thomasschulenberg assessmentofademonstratorrepositoryforindividualclinicaltrialdatabuiltupondspaceversion2peerreview2approved
AT stevecanham assessmentofademonstratorrepositoryforindividualclinicaltrialdatabuiltupondspaceversion2peerreview2approved
AT ritabanzi assessmentofademonstratorrepositoryforindividualclinicaltrialdatabuiltupondspaceversion2peerreview2approved
AT wolfgangkuchinke assessmentofademonstratorrepositoryforindividualclinicaltrialdatabuiltupondspaceversion2peerreview2approved
AT christianohmann assessmentofademonstratorrepositoryforindividualclinicaltrialdatabuiltupondspaceversion2peerreview2approved
_version_ 1724737607987888128