Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Oct 16;8(1):21.
doi: 10.1186/1751-0473-8-21.

Dispelling myths about rare disease registry system development

Affiliations

Dispelling myths about rare disease registry system development

Matthew Bellgard et al. Source Code Biol Med. .

Erratum in

Abstract

Rare disease registries (RDRs) are an essential tool to improve knowledge and monitor interventions for rare diseases. If designed appropriately, patient and disease related information captured within them can become the cornerstone for effective diagnosis and new therapies. Surprisingly however, registries possess a diverse range of functionality, operate in different, often-times incompatible, software environments and serve various, and sometimes incongruous, purposes. Given the ambitious goals of the International Rare Diseases Research Consortium (IRDiRC) by 2020 and beyond, RDRs must be designed with the agility to evolve and efficiently interoperate in an ever changing rare disease landscape, as well as to cater for rapid changes in Information Communication Technologies. In this paper, we contend that RDR requirements will also evolve in response to a number of factors such as changing disease definitions and diagnostic criteria, the requirement to integrate patient/disease information from advances in either biotechnology and/or phenotypying approaches, as well as the need to adapt dynamically to security and privacy concerns. We dispel a number of myths in RDR development, outline key criteria for robust and sustainable RDR implementation and introduce the concept of a RDR Checklist to guide future RDR development.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Registry aggregation. A schematic of how disease/patient registries might be aggregated.

References

    1. Forrest CB. et al.The case for a global rare-diseases registry. Lancet. 2011;8(9771):1057–1059. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60680-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mehta A. The how (and why) of disease registers. Early Hum Dev. 2010;8(11):723–728. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2010.08.006. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rubinstein YR. et al.Creating a global rare disease patient registry linked to a rare diseases biorepository database: Rare Disease-HUB (RD-HUB) Contemp Clin Trials. 2010;8(5):394–404. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2010.06.007. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Backus LI. et al.Clinical case registries: simultaneous local and national disease registries for population quality management. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009;8(6):775–783. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M3203. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Evans SM. et al.Development of clinical-quality registries in Australia: the way forward. Med J Aust. 2011;8(7):360–363. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources