WorksheetsSECTION A: SDV vs SDR
Total questions: 100
Worksheet time: 50mins
SDV primarily involves:
Reviewing protocol deviations
Comparing CRF data against source documents
Reviewing audit reports
Database locking
SDR focuses on:
100% verification of data
Validation of EDC systems
Evaluation of data quality and critical processes
Statistical analysis
Under risk-based monitoring, SDR replaces:
All monitoring activities
On-site visits
SDV entirely
Traditional 100% SDV
Which data is typically prioritized for SDV?
Administrative logs
Financial records
Primary efficacy endpoints
Training attendance
SDR is best described as:
Data transcription review
Statistical data cleaning
Holistic review of site processes and data trends
Source document archiving
A key advantage of SDR is:
Increased site workload
Reduced CRA responsibility
Improved efficiency and focus on critical data
Elimination of monitoring plans
Which document defines the SDV/SDR strategy?
CRF Completion Guidelines
Monitoring Plan
Investigator Brochure
Protocol Synopsis
In SDR, missing data trends are identified by:
Line-by-line comparison
Statistical and clinical review
Ethics Committee
Pharmacy staff
SDV is least useful for:
Informed consent verification
Serious adverse event confirmation
Identifying systemic site issues
Endpoint validation
Which approach is emphasized in ICH E6 (R3)?
100% SDV
No on-site monitoring
Risk-based monitoring including SDR
Remote monitoring only
SDR reviews include:
Drug accountability logs only
Data trends, protocol compliance, safety reporting
Investigator CVs
Vendor contracts
An example of critical data for SDR is:
Study budget
Subject initials
Eligibility criteria
Site address
SDV requires:
Access to source documents
Statistical software
Safety database access
TMF ownership
SDR can be performed:
Only on-site
Only by QA
On-site and remotely
Only after database lock
Which is NOT a goal of SDR?
Ensuring subject safety
Identifying systemic errors
Verifying every data point
Assessing data reliability
SDV intensity is usually determined by:
CRA preference
Sponsor SOPs only
Risk assessment
Investigator decision
Which scenario supports reduced SDV?
First-in-human study
High-risk IMP
Well-controlled low-risk study
High SAE rate
SDR findings usually lead to:
Immediate database lock
Root cause analysis
Subject withdrawal
Protocol amendment
SDR focuses more on:
Individual errors
Systemic issues
Typographical mistakes
Formatting errors
Which activity is common to both SDV and SDR?
Statistical programming
Data quality assessment
TMF reconciliation
Site initiation
SDR supports which principle?
Quality by inspection
Quality by design
Total quality management
Post-marketing surveillance
Which data is usually excluded from SDV?
SAEs
Primary endpoint
Non-critical exploratory data
Eligibility criteria
SDR findings are documented in:
Audit reports
Monitoring visit reports
CSR only
Protocol deviation logs
Which role primarily performs SDV/SDR?
Investigator
CRA
Statistician
Ethics Committee
SDR supports early detection of:
Data entry delays
Systemic non-compliance
Budget overruns
Vendor issues
SDV is considered:
Process-focused
Trend-focused
Data-point focused
Outcome-focused
Which is a limitation of SDV?
Identifies systemic risks
Resource intensive
Improves efficiency
Enhances oversight
SDR typically reviews:
Random samples
Entire database line-by-line
Only pharmacy data
Only lab data
Risk-based monitoring aims to:
Eliminate monitoring
Focus on what matters most
Increase SDV
Reduce documentation
Which factor increases SDV need?
Experienced site
Low enrollment
Complex protocol
Automated data capture
SDR complements SDV by:
Replacing audits
Identifying trends SDV may miss
Eliminating queries
Locking data early
Which is reviewed during SDR but not SDV?
Consent signatures
Protocol compliance trends
Source notes
Lab reports
SDV errors usually result in:
CAPA only
Data queries
Site closure
Ethics reporting
SDR supports regulatory expectations by:
Increasing documentation
Enhancing data integrity and subject protection
Eliminating SDV
Reducing CRA oversight
The primary responsibility for IP accountability lies with:
CRA
Sponsor
Investigator/site
Ethics Committee
IP accountability records must document:
Only dispensing
Receipt, storage, dispensing, return/destruction
Budget usage
Randomization only
Temperature excursions should be:
Ignored if brief
Documented and assessed for impact
Reported only at close-out
Corrected without documentation
IP should be stored:
Anywhere convenient
With site supplies
As per protocol and pharmacy manual
In investigator office
The CRA’s role in IP management includes:
Dispensing IP
Accountability verification
Manufacturing IP
Labeling IP
IP labels must include:
Subject name
Study identification and storage conditions
Investigator signature
Price
Reconciliation of IP is performed:
Only at study end
During monitoring visits
Only by sponsor
Only during audits
Blinded studies require:
Open-label dispensing
Controlled access to randomization codes
IP destruction requires
Verbal confirmation
Sponsor authorization
CRA approval
EC approval only
Which document guides IP handling?
Monitoring Plan
Pharmacy Manual
CSR
TMF Index
Drug accountability discrepancies indicate
Minor issue only
Potential compliance risk
Data management issue
Statistical error
IP expiry management is responsibility of
Sponsor only
CRA only
Site with CRA oversight
Ethics Committee
Returned IP should be
Re-dispensed
Destroyed immediately without record
Accounted and stored securely
Given to subjects
IP accountability logs should be
Optional
Retrospectively completed
Accurate and contemporaneous
Maintained by CRA
CRA verifies IP by
Interviewing subjects only
Physical count vs records
Reviewing EDC
Checking CSR
Temperature monitoring devices should be
Optional
Calibrated and documented
Used only during shipment
Ignored
IP shipment receipt should be documented by
Sponsor
Courier
Site staff
CRA
Emergency unblinding should be
Avoided even for safety
Documented and justified
Done by CRA
Done without notification
IP storage access should be
Unrestricted
Limited to authorized personnel
Open to monitors
Shared with lab samples
IP mis-dispensing is classified as
Data query
Protocol deviation
SAE
Audit finding only
CRA identifies repeated IP errors; next step?
Ignore
Document and escalate
Close site
Amend protocol
IP compliance assessment is done by
Pill counts / returns
Lab reports
AE logs
Financial records
IP accountability must reconcile with
Subject diary only
EDC enrollment
Sponsor inventory
All applicable records
Which is critical for blinded IP?
Transparent labeling
Identical appearance
Investigator knowledge
Subject awareness
IP handling deviations must be
Ignored if no impact
Documented and assessed
Deleted
Reported as SAE
CRA review of IP supports
Subject safety
Data integrity
Compliance
All of the above
IP destruction certificates are filed in
Site TMF
Investigator CV
CRF
CSR only
Accountability logs should be
Editable anytime
Signed and dated
Maintained by sponsor
Destroyed post-study
IP recall requires
Immediate subject withdrawal
Controlled communication and documentation
CRA discretion only
No action
CRA ensures IP management complies with:
Site preference
Protocol and regulations
Sponsor budget
Subject request
IP accountability discrepancies may lead to:
CAPA
Audit findings
Regulatory action
All of the above
IP storage conditions are verified by:
Monitoring visits
Statistical review
Ethics committee
CSR writing
IP management documentation retention follows:
Site discretion
Regulatory requirements
CRA preference
Subject consent
Final IP reconciliation is confirmed during:
SIV
IMV
Close-out visit
Database lock
An AE is defined as:
Any unfavorable medical occurrence
Only drug-related events
Only serious events
Protocol deviations
An SAE includes:
Mild headache
Hospitalization
Lab abnormality without symptoms
Protocol deviation
AE causality is assessed by:
CRA
Sponsor
Investigator
Ethics Committee
SAE reporting timelines are:
Flexible
Defined by regulations
Determined by CRA
Optional
All AEs must be:
Reported to EC immediately
Recorded in CRF
Reported to regulator
Ignored if mild
SAE initial report should be:
Complete before submission
Submitted promptly even if incomplete
Submitted after database lock
Submitted by CRA
Unexpected SAEs are:
Expected reactions
Not in IB or label
Always non-related
Protocol deviations
The CRA verifies SAE reporting by:
Medical judgment
Source vs safety database review
Causality assessment
EC approval
AE severity is graded by:
CRA
Sponsor
Investigator
Monitor
Follow-up SAE information should be:
Optional
Submitted as available
Ignored
Submitted annually only
Which AE must be reported as SAE?
Mild nausea
Death
Headache
Injection site pain
Pregnancy in a trial subject is:
AE only
SAE only
Special situation requiring reporting
Protocol deviation only
SAE reconciliation ensures:
Data entry speed
Consistency across records
Budget accuracy
EC approval
AE onset date should reflect:
CRA visit date
First awareness by investigator
Data entry date
Monitoring date
AE outcome includes:
Only recovered
Only fatal
Recovered, ongoing, fatal, unknown
Not required
CRA identifies delayed SAE reporting; action?
Ignore
Document and escalate
Close site
Amend protocol
AE reporting period is defined in:
Protocol
Monitoring Plan
CSR
TMF Index
Safety narratives are required for:
All AEs
SAEs
Minor deviations
All lab abnormalities
Relationship of AE to IP is:
CRA decision
Sponsor decision
Investigator decision
EC decision
SAE reports must be:
Signed by CRA
Medically reviewed
Submitted post-lock
Optional
AE underreporting impacts:
Subject safety
Data integrity
Regulatory compliance
All of the above
Safety data review is part of:
SDV only
SDR and SDV
Database lock
CSR only
AE coding is done using:
WHO-DD only
MedDRA
ICD-10
Free text
CRA reviews AE logs against:
Lab data only
Source notes and CRF
Budget
Monitoring plan
SAE follow-up ends when:
Subject withdraws
Event is resolved or stabilized
Database lock
CRA visit
Which is NOT an SAE criterion?
Death
Hospitalization
Mild transient fever
Life-threatening event
AE documentation should be:
Retrospective
Contemporaneous
Optional
CRA-completed
Safety oversight responsibility ultimately lies with:
CRA
Sponsor and Investigator
Ethics Committee only
Data Manager
Effective AE/SAE management ensures:
Regulatory compliance
Subject protection
Data credibility
All of the above
Reduce SDV should be justified by :
CRA workload
cost constraints
Risk assessment documentation
Site request
Which finding is most critical?
Missing signature
Minor calculation error
Unaccountable IP units
Late entry
Medically important event are :
Always non serious
Considered serious even without hospitalization
Protocol Deviations
Data Errors
