Jump to page content

Background / Rationale

While there are ample examples of secondary use (SU) of health data (HD) studies yielding valuable knowledge, there are also examples of studies that have a high risk of bias and provide misinformation. For example, prominent papers about Covid-19 were retracted after concerns had been expressed about the credibility of the database the results were based on. Cases like this highlight the need for more transparency in SU/HD studies.


While there is a large infrastructure for clinical trial transparency, no extensive infrastructure seems to exist for SU/HD studies. In this project, we assess to what extent guidance for SU/HD studies does exist.


We will do a systematic search of peer-reviewed literature, documents from health organizations, and websites from health databases to find any guidance that helps researchers make their SU/HD studies more transparent.

Expected results / Implications / Perspectives

Based on this assessment, we will identify gaps in the literature and provide recommendations for the development of respective guidance as well as for future research on transparency in SU/HD studies.
[Translate to englisch:]

Olmo van den Akker

Research fellow

Contact information