Click here to open the filter panel
Click a letter to view all its definitions
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Term of the Day

Natural history study

A natural history study is a preplanned observational study intended to track the course of a disease over time, identifying demographic, genetic, environmental and other variables that correlate with its development and outcomes in the absence of intervention, or under standard of care. Designs may be retrospective (chart review of existing records) or prospective (longitudinal follow-up of a cohort or registry).

Natural history data is particularly important in rare and paediatric diseases, where randomised placebo-controlled trials may be infeasible or unethical. The FDA (guidance on rare disease natural history studies, 2019) and the EMA accept well-designed natural history studies to define endpoints and biomarkers, identify patient subgroups, estimate sample sizes and, in some cases, serve as external or historical control arms for single-arm trials supporting orphan products.

Because they are non-interventional, natural history studies fall outside the CTR and are governed by national law (for example France's MR-003 or MR-004 reference methodologies) and by the GDPR. They typically involve secondary use of medical records, long-term follow-up, genetic data and small populations in which anonymisation is rarely achievable, so pseudonymisation, a DPIA and a robust research legal basis under Art. 9(2)(j) are essential. Registries maintained by patient organisations or academic consortia raise additional questions of joint controllership and data access governance.

O

Observer-reported outcome (ObsRO)

An observer-reported outcome (ObsRO) is a type of clinical outcome assessment based on a report of observable signs, events or behaviours related to a patient's health condition by someone other than the patient or a health professional, typically a parent, spouse or caregiver who observes the patient in daily life. The observer does not require professional training and reports what is observed, not the patient's internal experience, which distinguishes an ObsRO from both a patient-reported outcome and a clinician-reported outcome.

ObsROs are used where patients cannot reliably report for themselves: infants and young children, people with severe cognitive impairment or advanced dementia, and patients with communication disorders. Examples include caregiver-reported seizure diaries in paediatric epilepsy, observer-rated pain or crying scales in infants, and behavioural scales in autism or Alzheimer's disease. Regulators expect ObsRO instruments to be validated for the specific observer and context and, where possible, to be complemented by other COA types.

ObsRO data is health data about the patient and, at the same time, personal data about the observer, whose identity, relationship to the patient and sometimes own wellbeing (caregiver burden) are recorded. Caregivers therefore need their own information notice and, where they are also the legally designated representative, the two roles should be distinguished in the consent documentation. Electronic diaries used by caregivers raise the same eCOA questions about device data, hosting and transfers.