Methodology: Difference between revisions

From Beacon
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
[Empty page]
<!--
 
'''Manual search''': validation, references are included
'''Manual search''': validation, references are included


Line 11: Line 10:
Clinicaltrials.gov: automatic search, humans go through the results to find what's useful.
Clinicaltrials.gov: automatic search, humans go through the results to find what's useful.


Agile methodology: collect open data, and then ask input from different stakeholders.
Agile methodology: collect open data, and then ask input from different stakeholders. -->
 
== Methodology ==
 
Our methodology encompasses various approaches to ensure a comprehensive and reliable collection and presentation of data. Here is an overview of the procedures and resources we utilize:
 
'''Manual Search:'''
 
Manual data collection is a significant part of our approach. We carefully search through relevant websites to acquire vital information, making use of diverse sources. When collecting data from claims/registries, we explore statistical and health authorities from each EU country. In the case of hospital capacity, we look into the specific pages of each cancer center being mapped, and for patient associations, their official websites. To maintain the integrity of the data we collect, we implement a robust validation process. This involves double-checking every piece of information before adding it to our platform. Furthermore, we ensure full transparency by providing references for every piece of data collected.
 
'''Grades of Evidence:'''
 
The sources of our information are classified and annotated even when the sources wish to remain anonymous. This classification system serves to provide our users with an insight into the provenance and reliability of our data. In this way, we can uphold transparency and trustworthiness in the data we present while still maintaining anonymity.
 
'''Surveys:'''
 
Surveys are an essential tool for us to verify, enhance, and gather feedback on the collected information. Once the data from a hospital is compiled, we share the respective page's link with them. We seek their insights to correct any inaccuracies, contribute additional information, and provide general feedback, ensuring that the data presented is accurate and complete.
 
'''PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov queries:'''
 
PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov form a key part of our research methodology. Initially, we perform an automatic search for hospital capacity data. The search results are then scrutinized by our team to identify the most useful information. Furthermore, the ClinicalTrials.gov platform provides us with invaluable data on clinical trials conducted by each hospital being mapped.
 
'''Agile Methodology:'''
 
We employ an agile methodology in our data collection process. Initially, we collect open data available from various sources. We then invite inputs from diverse stakeholders including patients, researchers, health providers, and policymakers. Their insights help shape and enhance the data we present, ensuring it remains accurate, relevant, and useful.
 
 
Our methodology is iterative and is constantly refined to ensure the highest quality of data presentation. This project is a collaborative effort, and we invite feedback and contributions from our community of users to continually improve and expand our database.

Revision as of 14:59, 9 June 2023


Methodology

Our methodology encompasses various approaches to ensure a comprehensive and reliable collection and presentation of data. Here is an overview of the procedures and resources we utilize:

Manual Search:

Manual data collection is a significant part of our approach. We carefully search through relevant websites to acquire vital information, making use of diverse sources. When collecting data from claims/registries, we explore statistical and health authorities from each EU country. In the case of hospital capacity, we look into the specific pages of each cancer center being mapped, and for patient associations, their official websites. To maintain the integrity of the data we collect, we implement a robust validation process. This involves double-checking every piece of information before adding it to our platform. Furthermore, we ensure full transparency by providing references for every piece of data collected.

Grades of Evidence:

The sources of our information are classified and annotated even when the sources wish to remain anonymous. This classification system serves to provide our users with an insight into the provenance and reliability of our data. In this way, we can uphold transparency and trustworthiness in the data we present while still maintaining anonymity.

Surveys:

Surveys are an essential tool for us to verify, enhance, and gather feedback on the collected information. Once the data from a hospital is compiled, we share the respective page's link with them. We seek their insights to correct any inaccuracies, contribute additional information, and provide general feedback, ensuring that the data presented is accurate and complete.

PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov queries:

PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov form a key part of our research methodology. Initially, we perform an automatic search for hospital capacity data. The search results are then scrutinized by our team to identify the most useful information. Furthermore, the ClinicalTrials.gov platform provides us with invaluable data on clinical trials conducted by each hospital being mapped.

Agile Methodology:

We employ an agile methodology in our data collection process. Initially, we collect open data available from various sources. We then invite inputs from diverse stakeholders including patients, researchers, health providers, and policymakers. Their insights help shape and enhance the data we present, ensuring it remains accurate, relevant, and useful.


Our methodology is iterative and is constantly refined to ensure the highest quality of data presentation. This project is a collaborative effort, and we invite feedback and contributions from our community of users to continually improve and expand our database.