EDP Sciences logo
Authentification abonné
Rechercher
Menu
Accueil Tous les numéros Volume 34 / Numéro 11 (Novembre 2018) Med Sci (Paris), 34 11 (2018) 972-977 Références
Numérique et santé
Accès gratuit
Numéro
Med Sci (Paris)
Volume 34, Numéro 11, Novembre 2018
Numérique et santé
Page(s) 972 - 977
Section M/S Revues
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/medsci/2018235
Publié en ligne 10 décembre 2018
  1. Geissbuhler A, Safran C, Buchan I, et al. Trustworthy reuse of health data: A transnational perspective. Int J Med Inform 2013 ; 82 : 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  2. Gunter TD, Terry NP. The emergence of national electronic health record architectures in the United States and Australia: models, costs, and questions. J Med Internet Res 2005 ; 7 : 1 e3. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Higgins JK. Electronic Health Records: Big Business, and Getting Bigger. TechNewsWorld Best of ECT News. 2010 (May 14). http://www.crmbuyer.com/story/69994.html. [Google Scholar]
  4. Jensen PB, Jensen LJ, Brunak S. Mining electronic health records: towards better research applications and clinical care. Nat Rev Genet 2012 ; 13 : 6 395–405. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bateman S. Médecine personnalisée, un concept flou, des pratiques diversifiées. Med/Sci (Paris) 2014; 30 (hors série n° 2) : 8–13. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Boudry C. Biologie/Médecine 2.0 : état des lieux. Med/Sci (Paris) 2012; 28 : 653–8. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Coorevits P, Sundgren M, Klein GO, et al. Electronic health records: new opportunities for clinical research. J Intern Med 2013 ; 274 : 6 547–560. [Google Scholar]
  8. De Moor G, Kalra D, Sundgren M, et al. Opportunities for clinical research in European hospitals: the EHR4CR platform. Health management 2014 ; 14 : 59–60. [Google Scholar]
  9. Tufts. Analysis and insight into critical drug development issues. Tufts University Center for the Study of Drug Development (CSDD). Impact Report 2013; 15(1) : 1–4. [Google Scholar]
  10. Tufts. Rising protocol complexity, execution burden varies widely by phase and therapeutic areas (TA). Tufts University Center for the Study of Drug Development (CSDD) Report 2010; 12(3). [Google Scholar]
  11. Sertkaya A, Birkenbach A, Berlind A, Eyraud J. Examination of Clinical Trial Costs and Barriers for Drug Development. ASPE 2014 July 25. http://aspe.hhs.gov/sp/reports/2014/ClinicalTrials/rpt_erg.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  12. Kalra D, Schmidt A, Potts HWW, et al. Case report from the EHR4CR project - A european survey on electronic health records systems for clinical research. iHealth Connections 2011; 1(2) : 108–13. [Google Scholar]
  13. Micallef J.. Table ronde 3: Comment améliorer la compétitivité de la France en recherche clinique. Med/Sci (Paris) 2014 ; 30 : 28–32. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. Getz K, Wenger J. Assessing the impact of protocol design change on clinical trial performance. Am J Ther 2008 ; 15 : 449–456. [Google Scholar]
  15. Alsumidaie M. Aggregated EMR: Mitigating trial risk through quality by design protocols. Applied Clinical Trials online 2014; August. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20140828131707-55450526-aggregated-emr-mitigating-trial-risk-through-quality-by-design-protocols. [Google Scholar]
  16. Mestre-Ferrandiz J, Sussex J, Towse A. The R&D cost of a new medicine. Office of Health Economics 2012. [Google Scholar]
  17. De Moor G, Sundgren M, Kalra D, et al. Using electronic health records for clinical research: the case of the EHR4CR project. J Biomed Inform 2014 ; 53 : 162–173. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y. Business Model Generation. PEARSON EDUCATION 2009 ; 288p. [Google Scholar]
  19. Dupont D, Beresniak A, Sundgren M, et al. Business analysis for a sustainable, multi-stakeholder ecosystem forleveraging the Electronic Health Records for Clinical Research (EHR4CR) platform in Europe. Int J Med Inform 2018 ; 97 : 341–352. [Google Scholar]
  20. Beresniak A, Schmidt A, Proeve J, et al. Cost-benefit assessment of using electronic health records data for clinical research versus current practices: Contribution of the Electronic Health Records for Clinical Research (EHR4CR) European Project. Contemp Clin Trials 2016 ; 46 : 85–91. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Dupont D, Beresniak A, Schmidt A, et al. Assessing the Financial Impact of Reusing Electronic Health Records Data for Clinical Research: Results from the EHR4CR European Project. J Health Med Informat 2016 ; 7(3) 235. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. Kalra D, Stroetmann V, Sundgren M, et al. The European Institute for Innovation through Health Data. Learn Health Sys 2018 ; 1 : 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  23. Salimi T, Lehner JP, Epstein RS. A framework for pharmaceutical value-based innovations. J Comp Eff Res 2012 : 1(Suppl. 1) : 3–7. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Lehner JP, Epstein RS, Salimi T. Integrating new approaches for clinical development: translational research and relative effectiveness. J Comp Eff Res 2012 ; 1(1 Suppl) : 15–21. [Google Scholar]
  25. Epstein R, Sidorov J, Lehner JP, Salimi T. Integrating scientific and real-world evidence within and beyond the drug development process. J Comp Eff Res 2012 ; 1 : (1 Suppl): 9–13. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Les statistiques affichées correspondent au cumul d'une part des vues des résumés de l'article et d'autre part des vues et téléchargements de l'article plein-texte (PDF, Full-HTML, ePub... selon les formats disponibles) sur la platefome Vision4Press.

Les statistiques sont disponibles avec un délai de 48 à 96 heures et sont mises à jour quotidiennement en semaine.

Le chargement des statistiques peut être long.