CCDM Exam Dumps - Certified Clinical Data Manager

In aCRF-to-database quality control (QC) audit, auditors compare data recorded on the paper Case Report Form (CRF) with data entered in the electronic database. If discrepancies exist thatcannot be explained by documented data handling conventions, they are classified asaudit findings.

PerGCDMP (Chapter: Data Quality Assurance and Control),data handling conventionsdefine acceptable data entry practices, transcription rules, and allowable transformations. These conventions ensure that CRF data are consistently interpreted and entered.

If a discrepancy deviates from these established rules, it indicates a process gap or error in data entry, validation, or training. Discrepancies justified by protocol design or CRF guidelines would not constitute findings.

Therefore,option C (Discrepancy not explained by the data handling conventions)correctly identifies the criterion for a true QC audit finding.

Reference (CCDM-Verified Sources):

SCDM GCDMP, Chapter: Data Quality Assurance and Control, Section 6.1 – Data Handling Conventions and QC Auditing

ICH E6(R2) GCP, Section 5.1 – Quality Management and Documentation of Deviations

FDA Guidance for Industry: Computerized Systems Used in Clinical Investigations, Section 6.5 – Data Verification and Audit Findings

When derived or calculated variables (likeBody Mass Index) are created, it is essential to document thealgorithmused and itsversionto ensure full data traceability and reproducibility.

According toGCDMP (Chapter: Database Design and Derived Data), every derived field must include metadata describing:

Thederivation algorithm(e.g., BMI = weight [kg] / height² [m²])

Theversionof the algorithm (if updates or revisions occur)

Any associateddata sourcesor transformation rules

This ensures consistent calculation across systems, prevents discrepancies during regulatory submissions, and aligns withFDAandCDISCdocumentation expectations.

Option B lacks version control, which is critical for traceability. Option C describes audit trail data (not derivation metadata), and option D refers to broader documentation, not specific algorithm traceability.

Hence,option A (Algorithm and algorithm version associated with the calculated value)is the correct and compliant answer.

Reference (CCDM-Verified Sources):

SCDM GCDMP, Chapter: Derived Data and Algorithms, Section 5.3 – Documentation and Metadata Requirements

ICH E6(R2) GCP, Section 5.5.3 – Derived Data and Validation Traceability

FDA Guidance for Industry: Providing Regulatory Submissions in Electronic Format – Data Definitions (Define.xml)

Adding multiple new sites late in the enrollment period creates aconcentrated influx of new datanear the end of the study. These sites typically start enrolling patients later, resulting in a“bolus” of Case Report Forms (CRFs)that must be entered, validated, and cleaned within a shorter timeframe to meet database lock deadlines.

According to theGood Clinical Data Management Practices (GCDMP, Chapter: Project Management and Data Flow), late site activation compresses the timeline for data management tasks, necessitating increased resources fordata entry, query management, and cleaning. Data management teams must anticipate this surge and plan accordingly—either by increasing staffing or revising timelines to prevent bottlenecks and maintain quality.

Whileoption D(increased query rates) can occur, it is a secondary effect. Themost direct and consistent impactis the surge in data volume requiring expedited processing near study end.

Reference (CCDM-Verified Sources):

SCDM GCDMP, Chapter: Project Management, Section 5.3 – Managing Changes in Site Activation and Data Flow

ICH E6(R2) GCP, Section 5.1 – Quality Management and Oversight

When an investigator retires mid-study and the replacement refuses to use theElectronic Data Capture (EDC)system, thedata managermust not take unilateral action but rathercollaborate with the study teamto explore acceptable solutions.

Per theGCDMP (Chapter: Project Management in Data Management), any deviation from the established data capture method — particularly a change that affects regulatory compliance, data consistency, or site operations — requires a cross-functional assessment. The study team, which includes clinical operations, project management, regulatory affairs, and data management, should evaluate feasible alternatives such as:

Allowing paper CRF entry followed by centralized data transcription,

Retraining site staff on EDC use, or

Temporarily suspending data entry until compliance can be restored.

Immediate site closure (option A) or unilateral decisions by data management (options C and D) violate escalation and communication protocols. Collaborative decision-making ensures continuity, compliance, and data integrity, in line withICH E6 (R2) GCPandFDA 21 CFR Part 11.

Reference (CCDM-Verified Sources):

SCDM Good Clinical Data Management Practices (GCDMP), Chapter: Project Management and Communication, Section 5.2 – Handling Site and Investigator Changes

ICH E6 (R2) Good Clinical Practice, Section 4.1 – Investigator Responsibilities

FDA Guidance for Industry: Computerized Systems Used in Clinical Investigations – Section on EDC Operations and Site Management

Themost common mode of data entryinElectronic Data Capture (EDC)systems issingle data entry.

According to theGCDMP (Chapter: Electronic Data Capture Systems), EDC systems have built-inedit checks, validation rules, and audit trailsthat ensure data accuracy and integrity at the point of entry. These real-time validation capabilities makedouble data entry(a legacy practice from paper studies) unnecessary.

EDC systems automatically verify data as they are entered by site staff, generating queries for inconsistencies or out-of-range values immediately.Blind verification (option B)andthird-party comparisons (option D)are not standard data entry modes but may be used for specialized reconciliation or external data imports.

Thus,single data entry (Option C)is the industry standard approach, ensuring both efficiency and compliance withFDA 21 CFR Part 11andICH E6 (R2)data integrity requirements.

Reference (CCDM-Verified Sources):

SCDM Good Clinical Data Management Practices (GCDMP), Chapter: Electronic Data Capture (EDC) Systems, Section 5.4 – Data Entry and Verification Processes

ICH E6 (R2) Good Clinical Practice, Section 5.5.3 – Computerized Systems and Data Validation

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 – Electronic Records and Electronic Signatures: Validation and Data Entry Requirements

In studies utilizingElectronic Data Capture (EDC)systems, many traditional paper-based processes such astracking and retrieving CRFsare eliminated or automated. However,query management and resolutionremain essential because discrepancies, missing data, and protocol deviations still require clarification and correction, regardless of the data collection medium.

According to theGCDMP (Chapter: Data Validation and Cleaning),data queriesare generated automatically or manually when inconsistencies are detected by edit checks. Sites must still respond to these queries electronically to ensure the integrity and completeness of data.

AandDare obsolete with EDC (no physical CRFs).

Brefers to manual data entry updates, which are replaced by direct EDC entry.

C (Resolving queries)continues as a key part of the data management workflow, even in fully electronic environments.

Thus,option Cis correct.

Reference (CCDM-Verified Sources):

SCDM GCDMP, Chapter: Data Validation and Cleaning, Section 5.4 – Query Generation and Resolution in EDC Systems

ICH E6(R2) GCP, Section 5.5.3 – Data Review and Query Resolution Requirements

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 – Electronic Records: Audit Trails and Query Documentation

C

The best long-term corrective and preventive action (CAPA) in this situation is acombination of user re-training, communication, and routine monitoring— as described inOption B.

According to theGCDMP (Chapter: Electronic Data Capture Systems)andFDA 21 CFR Part 11, user credentials and electronic signatures in clinical systems arelegally bindingand must be used only by the assigned individual. Simultaneous log-ins under the same credentials often indicatecredential sharing, acompliance violationthat must be addressed through user education, reinforced security policies, and ongoing system oversight.

While technical controls (option A) may be considered, behavioral and procedural reinforcement are the first lines of defense. Options C and D are excessive and not aligned with proportional CAPA practices.

Reference (CCDM-Verified Sources):

SCDM Good Clinical Data Management Practices (GCDMP), Chapter: Electronic Data Capture (EDC) Systems, Section 7.1 – User Access, Authentication, and Training

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 – Electronic Records and Electronic Signatures, Sections 11.10(i) and 11.200(a)

ICH E6 (R2) Good Clinical Practice, Section 5.5.3 – Access Control and Audit Trail Requirements

Thesite-work dimension of site performanceevaluates how efficiently sites manage and resolve data-related tasks — particularly query resolution, data entry, and correction timelines. Among the given metrics, themedian and range of time from query generation to resolution (D)directly measures the site’s responsiveness and data management efficiency.

According to theGCDMP (Chapter on Metrics and Performance Measurement), this indicator helps identify sites that delay query resolution, which can impact overall study timelines and data quality. Tracking this metric allows the data management team to proactively provide additional training or communication to underperforming sites.

Other options measure different aspects of project progress:

Areflects overall database closure speed.

BandCrelate to study startup and enrollment readiness, not ongoing data work.

Thus,option Daccurately represents asite performance timeliness metric, aligning with CCDM principles for operational performance measurement.

Reference (CCDM-Verified Sources):

SCDM Good Clinical Data Management Practices (GCDMP), Chapter: Metrics and Performance Management, Section 5.4 – Site Query Resolution Metrics

ICH E6(R2) Good Clinical Practice, Section 5.18 – Monitoring and Site Performance Oversight