
Background: Numerous clinical studies are now underway investigating aspects of COVID-19. The aim of this study was to identify a selection of national and/or multicentre clinical COVID-19 studies in the United Kingdom to examine the feasibility and outcomes of documenting the most frequent data elements common across studies to rapidly inform future study design and demonstrate proof-of-concept for further subject-specific study data element mapping to improve research data management. Methods: 25 COVID-19 studies were included. For each, information regarding the specific data elements being collected was recorded. Data elements collated were arbitrarily divided into categories for ease of visualisation. Elements which were most frequently and consistently recorded across studies are presented in relation to their relative commonality. Results: Across the 25 studies, 261 data elements were recorded in total. The most frequently recorded 100 data elements were identified across all studies and are presented with relative frequencies. Categories with the largest numbers of common elements included demographics, admission criteria, medical history and investigations. Mortality and need for specific respiratory support were the most common outcome measures, but with specific studies including a range of other outcome measures. Conclusion: The findings of this study have demonstrated that it is feasible to collate specific data elements recorded across a range of studies investigating a specific clinical condition in order to identify those elements which are most common among studies. These data may be of value for those establishing new studies and to allow researchers to rapidly identify studies collecting data of potential use hence minimising duplication and increasing data re-use and interoperability
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
