Translate this page into:
Turning data into decision to innovate in medical sciences
*Corresponding author: Dr. Anil K Jain Editor-in-Chief, Annals of National Academy of Medical Sciences (India), Ex-Principal, University College of Medical Sciences and Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, Delhi, India. profakjain@gmail.com
-
Received: ,
Accepted: ,
How to cite this article: Jain AK, Jain P. Turning data into decision to innovate in medical sciences. Ann Natl Acad Med Sci (India). 2025;61:311-3. doi: 10.25259/ANAMS_250_2025
Life has evolved from single-celled organisms to Homo sapiens, the most cognitively advanced species on Earth, capable of listening, seeing, interpreting, rationalizing, and innovating. Biological evolution has followed a well-defined timeline, and this continuity has been mirrored by medical science, which is fundamentally concerned with the well-being of living organisms.
In ancient and prehistoric times, treatments were often painful and unpredictable, with outcomes that were frequently worse than the diseases themselves. In contrast, modern medical science is built on research evidence and continues to evolve rapidly.1,2
This evolution has profoundly impacted life expectancy:
-
In ancient Rome (1st century AD), average life expectancy was around 25 years.
-
Today, it exceeds 80 years in most developed nations.
-
In India, life expectancy has increased from approximately 40 years at independence (1947) to over 67 years today.
These advances have also led to lower mortality rates, improved infant survival, and better health indices across populations.
TYPES OF MEDICAL RESEARCH
-
Basic research- Conducted at the cellular, molecular, or genetic level in laboratories. It focuses on understanding fundamental mechanisms, often without immediate clinical application.
-
Applied research- Aims to solve practical health problems or improve existing processes and treatments.
-
Translational research- Bridges laboratory discoveries and clinical practices (“bench to bedside”), applying new knowledge to patient care.
THE BIDIRECTIONAL LOOP IN MEDICAL RESEARCH
-
Bench to bedside: Researchers study fundamental biology to develop diagnostics, biomarkers, drugs, vaccines, and devices. These innovations are evaluated through clinical trials before being integrated into patient care.
-
Bedside to bench: Clinicians observe unexpected responses, adverse effects, resistance patterns, or unusual presentations. These clinical observations generate new research questions that are taken back to the laboratory. This process refines scientific understanding, identifies novel therapeutic targets, and advances personalized medicine. This closes the loop between clinical practice and basic science.
CENTRAL ROLE OF DATA
The core of both bench-to-bedside and bedside-to-bench research is data. High-quality patient data is the foundation of reliable research and its translation into improved patient outcomes. Data in health sciences are the recorded measurements, observations, or events about people, populations, and health systems, captured in a form that can be stored, shared, and analyzed to support care, public health, research, and policy.3
Attributes of robust health data include:4
-
Accuracy: Correctly represents what was measured or observed.
-
Completeness: No missing critical data points.
-
Consistency: Uniform across data sources and time.
-
Timeliness: Recorded promptly to reflect real-world conditions.
-
Reliability: Reproducible under similar conditions.
-
Integrity & security: Protected against unauthorized access or alteration.
Maintaining data quality is not a one-time task; it requires continuous, rigorous processes involving:
-
Standardized data collection and secure management,
-
Regular monitoring, and
-
Transparent reporting.
High-quality data ensures that research is trustworthy, reproducible, and impactful. Improvements in data systems over recent decades have directly enhanced the quality of medical research. This can be appreciated if we analyze the orthopedic literature published over the last 75 years (1950 AD-2025 AD)
EVOLUTION OF MEDICAL RESEARCH OVER 75 YEARS (1950–2025)
Between 1950–1970
Most publications in orthopedics were case reports, case series (mostly retrospective), and descriptions of surgical techniques, which formed the backbone of orthopedic literature. There were few comparative studies (e.g., British medical research council Working party trial on bone tuberculosis). Most of the research reflected regional patterns of disease, such as bone TB and polio in Asia and Africa. The evidence-based medicine (EBM) and concept of hierarchy of evidence was not yet evolved and widely recognized.
Between 1970–1990: A transformative era
In this period, though the research output moved to some prospective studies, multicenter studies mostly from the West, and biomechanical research, developing countries continue to publish mostly retrospective data without clarity about the nature of data collections. Most of the rejection from indexed journal to manuscripts from India and limited resource countries was due to unreliable data. Around 1990, some thoughts about EBM emerged from Canada. Imaging has taken a leap, thus more imaging-related studies have started appearing in international literature. By this time, the foundation for modern subspecialities like trauma, arthroplasty, spine, pediatrics, and sports medicine was laid. The hierarchy of evidence was known by this time, where the levels of evidence were listed. The opinion/case reports were listed under the lowest level of evidence (level 5). Retrospective case series as level 4, case control studies as level 3, prospective case series as level 2, and randomized control trials (RCT) as level 1. Meta-analysis of RCT is considered as best evidence. The scientific community learnt how to conduct these studies and analyzed published data at different levels of evidence.5,6
This era was the bridge era between descriptive, technique-based research and the modern evidence-based, data-driven era. This era provided a scientific foundation for high-quality evidence-based orthopedics of the 1990s onwards.
Between 1990-2010
In this era significant expansion of the EBM movement took place. The widespread use of imaging and computer technology and the growth of multicenter RCT and registry-based studies were published globally. Mid-late 1990s saw improved implant designs, reporting guidelines (CONSORT, STROBE). There was a surge in registry-based studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. In India, though we have adopted EBM principles but mostly observational studies were reported due to infrastructure limitations, which also include limited detailing of data recording and data analysis. As a result, India lagged in global trends, and articles submitted from India were not universally accepted. The estimated distribution of evidence levels in Indian orthopedics in this era showed level IV/V manuscripts in 40-45% instances; 5-7% were level I, 15-20% were level II, and 30% were retrospective cohort/case control studies. On the contrary, global research showed an increase in the level I-II evidence. The researchers in India started recognizing the need for robust data, analyzing it, and reporting.
Between 2010-2025
This era is now a maturing phase of orthopedic research. Globally, a trend with more RCTs, registry-based studies, AI-enabled diagnostics, translational work, health services research, and systematic evidence synthesis has emerged. Overall quality of global research improved with better designs, better reporting, and statistical rigor.
Indian research followed the global trends in volume acceleration, with an increasing number of Indian journals being introduced and recognized as of international standard. Many were included in indexed databases and published articles on clinical problems unique to limited-resource countries. Indian researchers continued to face challenges due to resource, infrastructure, and collaboration constraints. India has to scale up the level of evidence of our publications by improving data recording, integrating real-world data, subjecting them to rigorous statistical analysis, and reporting, which may be single-center or multicenter. India is in a unique position with having a huge patient load (most simple to complex cases), being treated in variable infrastructure (most advanced state-of-the-art hospital as of international standard to basic health facilities. We can generate evidence for the West as well as for limited-resource populations. This is possible if we record credible data on every patient we treat.
Data recording timeline in India: Between 1950-70, the health data recording was paper-based, which had a low reliability. Most of the research analysis was on crude data; however, by 1970-90, the data recording improved in paper format, though it was only study-based and mostly retrospective data. After 1990, early digital data recording was initiated, though at an individual level for non-funded research purposes by a few. By 2010, computerized recording of data started, and electronic medical records (EMR) adoption took place. EMR means electronic record of health-related information on an individual that can be created, gathered, managed, and consulted by authorized clinicians and staff within one health care organization. This was being done mostly at the hospital level and in private organizations. The public hospitals, though, are treating more than 50% patients still do not have an EMR.
IMPORTANCE OF DATA IN HEALTH SCIENCES
Foundation of EBM: EBM rests on high-quality data. When studies are designed well, with appropriate comparators, adequate power, unbiased measurement, and transparent reporting, the resulting data quantify benefits, risks, and uncertainty. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses integrate these findings, and clinical guidelines translate them into clear recommendations that improve outcomes and lower complications.
Understanding disease patterns: The epidemiological data helps in identifying incidence, prevalence, and trends of diseases so that early detection of outbreaks, emerging patterns (like drug-resistant TB) can be identified for timely resource allocation. The longitudinal data reveal the natural history of diseases, including progression, remission, or relapse. COVID-19 has amply displayed the information retrieved from data.
Guiding diagnosis and treatment: The diagnostic research (biomarkers, imaging, molecular tests) data improves the accuracy and timeliness of diagnosis, and comparative data on different therapies guide clinicians to choose the most effective and safe treatments. It helps in defining treatment protocols (e.g., identification, diagnosis, treatment protocol of drug-resistant bone and joint TB), and defining optimal duration of anti tubercular treatment in bone and joint TB.7
Enhancing innovation and translational research: The bedside (clinical cases) data highlights unmet clinical needs, steering bench research toward practical solutions. The preclinical and laboratory data inform drug development, vaccines, and surgical innovations. Large datasets (e.g., genomics, proteomics) enable personalized medicine.
Quality assurance and safety monitoring: The continuous data collection through registries, audits, and pharmacovigilance helps monitor treatment outcomes, complications, and adverse drug reactions and long-term safety of interventions (e.g., implants, biologics). It also supports policy updates to enhance patient safety.
Facilitating public health planning: The aggregated data guides policymakers in planning vaccination drives, screening programs, and resource distribution. It also enables cost-effective interventions, minimizing waste of limited healthcare resources.
Supporting research integrity and collaboration: The open-access data and data sharing improve reproducibility and allow validation by other researchers. It facilitates multi-center studies and meta-analyses, increasing statistical power and confidence in findings.
Role of digital health and big data: EMRs, hospital information systems, and health registries create real-world datasets. Big data analytics helps in predictive modeling (e.g., forecasting TB trends, predicting treatment response). Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning rely on high-quality datasets to generate diagnostic and prognostic tools.
Summarily, high-quality, accurate, and systematically collected data are indispensable in medical research. It bridges clinical observation and laboratory science, accelerates translational research, informs evidence-based care, and ultimately improves patient health and public health outcomes.
References
- Innovations in orthopaedics: Hypothesis to publication. Indian J Orthop. 2012;46:605-7.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]
- Research in orthopedics: A necessity. Indian J Orthop. 2009;43:315-7.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]
- FDA RWE framework (definitions uses of real-world data): https://www.fda.gov/media/120060/download [Last accessed 2025 Oct 10]
- Common data quality elements for health information systems: A systematic review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2024;24:243.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]
- Evidence-based orthopedics: One step closer! Indian J Orthop. 2011;45:3.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]
- The need for evidence-based orthopedics. Indian J Orthop. 2007;41:3.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Drug-resistant bone, joint and spine tuberculosis: Evolution of diagnosis and treatment. Indian J Orthop. 2024;58:661-8.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]