This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
European Commission. European Health Data Space. Available from https://ec.europa.eu/health/ehealth/dataspace_en (accessed 12 November 2021).European CommissionEuropean Health Data SpaceAvailable from https://ec.europa.eu/health/ehealth/dataspace_en (accessed 12 November 2021).Search in Google Scholar
European Commission. Digital Health and Care: Transformation of health and care in the digital single market – Harnessing the potential of data to empower citizens and build a healthier society. [Infographic]. 2018. Available from https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/default/files/ehealth/docs/2018_ehealth_infographic_en.pdf (accessed 12 November 2021).European CommissionDigital Health and Care: Transformation of health and care in the digital single market – Harnessing the potential of data to empower citizens and build a healthier society. [Infographic]2018Available from https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/default/files/ehealth/docs/2018_ehealth_infographic_en.pdf (accessed 12 November 2021).Search in Google Scholar
Orphanet. Rare disease registries in Europe. Orphanet Report Series: Rare Diseases collection. September 2020. Available from https://www.orpha.net/orphacom/cahiers/docs/GB/Registries.pdf (accessed 12 November 2021).OrphanetRare disease registries in Europe. Orphanet Report Series: Rare Diseases collectionSeptember2020Available from https://www.orpha.net/orphacom/cahiers/docs/GB/Registries.pdf (accessed 12 November 2021).Search in Google Scholar
Dolan G, Makris M, Bolton-Maggs PHB, Rowell JA. Enhancing haemophilia care through registries. Haemophilia 2014; 20: 121–129. doi: 10.1111/hae.12406.DolanGMakrisMBolton-MaggsPHBRowellJAEnhancing haemophilia care through registriesHaemophilia20142012112910.1111/hae.1240624762287Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Ljung RCR. Registries and databases – A European perspective. Haemophilia 2020; 26: 26–28. doi: 10.1111/hae.13920.LjungRCRRegistries and databases – A European perspectiveHaemophilia202026262810.1111/hae.1392032356342Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Nicholson N, Perego A. Interoperability of population-based patient registries. J Biomed Inform X 2020; 112 (supplement): 100074. doi: 10.1016/j.yjbinx.2020.100074.NicholsonNPeregoAInteroperability of population-based patient registriesJ Biomed Inform X2020112supplement10007410.1016/j.yjbinx.2020.10007434417011Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Hay CRM, Shima M, Makris M, et al. Challenges and key lessons from the design and implementation of an international haemophilia registry supposed by a pharmaceutical company. Haemophilia 2020; 26: 966–974. doi: 10.1111/hae.14144.HayCRMShimaMMakrisMChallenges and key lessons from the design and implementation of an international haemophilia registry supposed by a pharmaceutical companyHaemophilia20202696697410.1111/hae.14144789435533094894Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Magajne M, Meglič M (eds). Methodological guidelines and recommendations for efficient and rational governance of patient registries. Cross-border Patient Registries Initiative (PARENT). Slovenia: National Institute of Public Health; 2015. Available from https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/default/files/ehealth/docs/patient_registries_guidelines_en.pdf (accessed 15 November 2021).MagajneMMegličM(eds).Methodological guidelines and recommendations for efficient and rational governance of patient registries. Cross-border Patient Registries Initiative (PARENT)SloveniaNational Institute of Public Health2015Available from https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/default/files/ehealth/docs/patient_registries_guidelines_en.pdf (accessed 15 November 2021).Search in Google Scholar
European Medicines Agency Patient Registries Initiative. Report on haemophilia registries workshop 8 June 2018. EMA/487643/2018. 28 September 2018. Available from https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/report/report-haemophilia-registries-workshop_en.pdf (accessed 15 November 2021).European Medicines Agency Patient Registries InitiativeReport on haemophilia registries workshop 8 June 2018. EMA/487643/201828September2018Available from https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/report/report-haemophilia-registries-workshop_en.pdf (accessed 15 November 2021).Search in Google Scholar
ECFS Patient Registry. Registry variables and definitions. Updated 21 October 2021. Available from https://www.ecfs.eu/projects/ecfs-patient-registry/variables-definitions (accessed 16 November 2021).ECFS Patient RegistryRegistry variables and definitions. Updated 21 October 2021Available from https://www.ecfs.eu/projects/ecfs-patient-registry/variables-definitions (accessed 16 November 2021).Search in Google Scholar
Grady C, Rubinstein YR, Groft SC. Informed consent and patient registry for the rare disease community: Editorial. Contemp Clin Trials 2012; 33(1): 3–4. doi: 11.1016/j.cct.2011.10.005.GradyCRubinsteinYRGroftSCInformed consent and patient registry for the rare disease community: EditorialContemp Clin Trials20123313411.1016/j.cct.2011.10.005Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Blumenthal S. Improving interoperability between registries and EHRs. AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc 2018; 2017: 20–25.BlumenthalSImproving interoperability between registries and EHRsAMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc201820172025Search in Google Scholar
Makady A, Ham RT, de Boer A, et al. GetReal Workpackage 1. Policies for use of real-world data in health technology assessment (HTA): A comparative study of six HTA agencies. Value Health 2017; 20(4): 520–532. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.12.003.MakadyAHamRTde BoerAGetReal Workpackage 1. Policies for use of real-world data in health technology assessment (HTA): A comparative study of six HTA agenciesValue Health201720452053210.1016/j.jval.2016.12.00328407993Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Makady A, van Veelen A, Jonsson P, et al. Using real-world data in health technology assessment (HTA) practice: A comparative study of five HTA agencies. Pharmacoeconomics 2018; 36(3): 359–368. doi: 10.1007/s40273-017-0596-z.MakadyAvan VeelenAJonssonPUsing real-world data in health technology assessment (HTA) practice: A comparative study of five HTA agenciesPharmacoeconomics201836335936810.1007/s40273-017-0596-z583459429214389Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Santanello N, Largent J, Myers E, et al. Engaging patients as partners throughout the registry life cycle. In: Gliklich RE, Dreyer NA, Leavy MB, et al. (eds). 21st Century Patient Registries: Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User's Guide. 3rd Edition, Addendum [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2018. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK493821/ (accessed 16 November 2021).SantanelloNLargentJMyersEEngaging patients as partners throughout the registry life cycleIn:GliklichREDreyerNALeavyMB(eds).21st Century Patient Registries: Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User's Guide3rd EditionAddendum [Internet].Rockville (MD)Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US)2018Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK493821/ (accessed 16 November 2021).Search in Google Scholar
Nelson EC, Dixon-Woods M, Batalden PB, et al. Patient focused registries can improve health, care and science. BMJ 2016; 354: i3319. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i3319.NelsonECDixon-WoodsMBataldenPBPatient focused registries can improve health, care and scienceBMJ2016354i331910.1136/bmj.i3319536761827370543Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
EHC. Think Tank. Available from https://www.ehc.eu/thinktank/ (accessed 12 November 2021).EHCThink TankAvailable from https://www.ehc.eu/thinktank/ (accessed 12 November 2021).Search in Google Scholar
Chatham House. Chatham House rule. Available from https://www.chathamhouse.org/about-us/chatham-house-rule (accessed 12 November 2021).Chatham HouseChatham House ruleAvailable from https://www.chathamhouse.org/about-us/chatham-house-rule (accessed 12 November 2021).Search in Google Scholar