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
. 2017 Feb 1;46(1):103-105.
doi: 10.1093/ije/dyw075.

Maelstrom Research guidelines for rigorous retrospective data harmonization

Affiliations

Maelstrom Research guidelines for rigorous retrospective data harmonization

Isabel Fortier et al. Int J Epidemiol. .

Abstract

Background: It is widely accepted and acknowledged that data harmonization is crucial: in its absence, the co-analysis of major tranches of high quality extant data is liable to inefficiency or error. However, despite its widespread practice, no formalized/systematic guidelines exist to ensure high quality retrospective data harmonization.

Methods: To better understand real-world harmonization practices and facilitate development of formal guidelines, three interrelated initiatives were undertaken between 2006 and 2015. They included a phone survey with 34 major international research initiatives, a series of workshops with experts, and case studies applying the proposed guidelines.

Results: A wide range of projects use retrospective harmonization to support their research activities but even when appropriate approaches are used, the terminologies, procedures, technologies and methods adopted vary markedly. The generic guidelines outlined in this article delineate the essentials required and describe an interdependent step-by-step approach to harmonization: 0) define the research question, objectives and protocol; 1) assemble pre-existing knowledge and select studies; 2) define targeted variables and evaluate harmonization potential; 3) process data; 4) estimate quality of the harmonized dataset(s) generated; and 5) disseminate and preserve final harmonization products.

Conclusions: This manuscript provides guidelines aiming to encourage rigorous and effective approaches to harmonization which are comprehensively and transparently documented and straightforward to interpret and implement. This can be seen as a key step towards implementing guiding principles analogous to those that are well recognised as being essential in securing the foundational underpinning of systematic reviews and the meta-analysis of clinical trials.

Keywords: Data harmonization; data integration; data processing; individual participant data; meta-analysis; retrospective harmonization.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart describing selection of harmonization initiatives from literature search and references from key informants.

References

    1. Gallacher JE. The case for large scale fungible cohorts. Eur J Public Health 2007;17:548–49. - PubMed
    1. Gallacher J, Hofer SM. Generating large-scale longitudinal data resources for aging research. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2011;66(Suppl 1):i172–79. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Frank C, Battista R, Butler L et al. Making an Impact: A Preferred Framework and Indicators to Measure Returns on Investment in Health Research. Ottawa, ON: CanadianAcademy of Health, 2009.
    1. Dalziel M, Roswell J, Tahmina TN, Xiao Zhao. Impact of government investments in research & innovation: review of academic investigations .Optimum ONline 2012;42(2).
    1. Wolfson M, Wallace SE, Masca N et al. DataSHIELD: resolving a conflict in contemporary bioscience – performing a pooled analysis of individual-level data without sharing the data. Int J Epidemiol 2010;39:1372–82. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms