Download Premium Content

First Name
Last Name
Country (Citizenship)
Opt-In to Future Emails
Thank you!
Error - something went wrong!

How a Three-Pronged Approach Improves Data Quality in Dermatology Trials

At 1,214 square miles, Rhode Island is officially the smallest state within the United States.
As with all its fellow states, its size is determined by precise and nationally recognized borders.  But, what if that weren’t the case? Imagine the downstream impact on citizens, addresses, tax codes, and school zones if Rhode Island’s borders were ambiguous.

Unfortunately, many dermatological trial assessments exist in a world with unclearly defined
borders. In fact, you may be surprised to learn that several studies show¹ ² that ambiguity in
the assessment of dermatological conditions is quite common in clinical trials. Simply stated,
what some see as covering 10% of a person’s body, others see as 20%. This is not the fault
of clinicians, raters, or the industry, it’s simply the result of human subjectivity. Nevertheless,
dermatological subjectivity can have several adverse consequences in trials. Most notably, it can lead to reporting skewed outcomes, inappropriately including or excluding patients, and skewed trial data – all of which may lead to false conclusions or obfuscate a true signal hidden among the noise.

Thus, it’s our job as an industry to increase accuracy wherever possible and ensure that all
patients  are measured according to best clinical trial standards. Thankfully, we have a few toolsat our disposal that can significantly reduce measurement inaccuracy in dermatology trials and ensure measurement standardization – training, data analytics, and intervention.

No Previous Flipbooks

Next Flipbook
Signant Health's Commitment to Data Privacy and Security
Signant Health's Commitment to Data Privacy and Security

How Signant achieves compliance with GDPR, and additional measures Signant has taken to ensure privacy and ...