の日本語版2025.2JP1が2025年6月30日にリリースされました。

The eClinical Forum is releasing its 8th public version of the “eCF Requirements” which takes all of the requirements and guidance directions that pertain to electronic data and electronic systems that support clinical research, from FDA, EMA, PMDA, MNPA, MHRA, TFDA and ICH , and boils them down into 37 unique statements or "eCF Requirements".

The eCF REG team puts out a yearly version of the "eCF Requirements" which many orgainizations use to check compliance of their systems against regulatory authority document statements. The previous versions have been requested in order to easily check the requirements that were in place in a particular year.

The eClinical Forum is releasing its 7th public version of the “eCF Requirements” which takes all of the requirements and guidance directions that pertain to electronic data and electronic systems that support clinical research, from FDA, EMA, PMDA, MNPA, MHRA and ICH , and boils them down into 37 unique statements or "eCF Requirements".

The "eCF Requirements" Members Release V2024 has been released.  This is a significant accomplishment by the eClinical Forum’s “Regulatory Expert Group” (REG) as they have put in countless hours over many years to be able to produce such a comprehensive list of compliance requirements for  electronic systems that will manage data used in regulated clinical research, against regulations and guidances from 40 different documents from FDA, EMA, PMDA, NMPA, MHRA and ICH and ISO.

The regulatory overview presented in this paper shows that while regulations are far from final for all use cases, the US and Europe have made the biggest steps toward monitoring and facilitating the use of AI, and regulations are in development in other regions around the globe.

The intent of this document is to provide a framework for individuals’ risk‐based decisions and best practices for implementing solutions for investigators’ signature collection on data reported to sponsor.

The eClinical Forum is happy to announce the release of the "Investigator’s signature on electronic Case Report Forms (eCRFs), PR2.1"

About the Best Practice Document: There is increased scrutiny by regulatory agencies on the collection of investigator’s signatures as evidence of the overall oversight on the eCRF is reported to the sponsor.  eClinical Forum PI Signature Working Group was formed in March 2021 to update the best practice document originally issued in 2017 by identifying best practices that are based on compliance to regulatory requirements and on risks such as reputation, credibility, legal liability of the data being used by the sponsor. 

The Regulatory Expert Group is happy to announce the release of the English translation of the JPMA EDC Management Sheet v2.00.  EDC Management Sheet is a tool by which Japan Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA) ensures  the computerized system used in clinical trials comply with relevant regulations and guidelines.This is an unofficial translation and made public for anyone to use. Please be advised that the original Japanese version should be used for any disputes.

Medical Informatics (Japan Society for Medical Informatics) article on use of eSRA to assess the requirements of the Japan MHLW's "Guideline on security management for medical information systems."

Several members of the eClinical Forum's Regulatory Advisory Group have published an article in Applied Clinical Trials on "When should audit trail begin?"  It is a discussion of the regulatory history behind audit trails and its interpretation as it relates to clinical research data originating or residing in EDC or eCOA systems.

We welcome feedback! Please send to: REG@eclinicalforum.org 

The Society for Clinical Data Management (SCDM) and eClinical Forum (eCF) Joint Task Force are pleased to announce the publication of an industry position paper “AUDIT TRAIL REVIEW: A KEY TOOL TO ENSURE DATA INTEGRITY” final version based on Industry Feedback.  With various electronic data capture modalities becoming the norm and the growing regulatory focus on data collection traceability, audit trails which capture the who, what, when, and why of electronic data entry and amendments are a critical tool.  This paper outlines an industry perspective on maximizing the value of implementing the targeted, routine review of these extremely large datasets. It provides recommendations on risk-based use cases for audit trail review (ATR) and the corresponding desired reporting criteria, with suggestions on when to use visualizations and exception report listings to generate key, actionable insights.