Background Vast sample sizes are often essential in the quest to disentangle the complex interplay of the genetic, lifestyle, environmental and social factors that determine the aetiology and progression of chronic diseases. The pooling of information between studies is therefore of central importance to contemporary bioscience. However, there are many technical, ethico-legal and scientific challenges to be overcome if an effective, valid, pooled analysis is to be achieved. Perhaps most critically, any data that are to be analysed in this way must be adequately ‘harmonized’. This implies that the collection and recording of information and data must be done in a manner that is sufficiently similar in the different studies to allow valid synthesis to take place.Methods This conceptual article describes the origins, purpose and scientific foundations of the DataSHaPER (DataSchema and Harmonization Platform for Epidemiological Research; http://www.datashaper.org), which has been created by a multidisciplinary consortium of experts that was pulled together and coordinated by three international organizations: P3G (Public Population Project in Genomics), PHOEBE (Promoting Harmonization of Epidemiological Biobanks in Europe) and CPT (Canadian Partnership for Tomorrow Project).Results The DataSHaPER provides a flexible, structured approach to the harmonization and pooling of information between studies. Its two primary components, the ‘DataSchema’ and ‘Harmonization Platforms’, together support the preparation of effective data-collection protocols and provide a central reference to facilitate harmonization. The DataSHaPER supports both ‘prospective’ and ‘retrospective’ harmonization.Conclusion It is hoped that this article will encourage readers to investigate the project further: the more the research groups and studies are actively involved, the more effective the DataSHaPER programme will ultimately be.

Treatment complexity was related to non-adherence in general. Beliefs about necessity were not strongly associated with non-adherence, while patients' concern beliefs may be associated with intentional non-adherence. However, the role of these determinants differs per therapeutic group.

Coffee consumption is a model for addictive behavior. We performed a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies (GWASs) on coffee intake from 8 Caucasian cohorts (N=18 176) and sought replication of our top findings in a further 7929 individuals. We also performed a gene expression analysis treating different cell lines with caffeine. Genome-wide significant association was observed for two single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the 15q24 region. The two SNPs rs2470893 and rs2472297 (P-values=1.6 × 10−11 and 2.7 × 10−11), which were also in strong linkage disequilibrium (r2=0.7) with each other, lie in the 23-kb long commonly shared 5′ flanking region between CYP1A1 and CYP1A2 genes. CYP1A1 was found to be downregulated in lymphoblastoid cell lines treated with caffeine. CYP1A1 is known to metabolize polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which are important constituents of coffee, whereas CYP1A2 is involved in the primary metabolism of caffeine. Significant evidence of association was also detected at rs382140 (P-value=3.9 × 10−09) near NRCAM—a gene implicated in vulnerability to addiction, and at another independent hit rs6495122 (P-value=7.1 × 10−09)—an SNP associated with blood pressure—in the 15q24 region near the gene ULK3, in the meta-analysis of discovery and replication cohorts. Our results from GWASs and expression analysis also strongly implicate CAB39L in coffee drinking. Pathway analysis of differentially expressed genes revealed significantly enriched ubiquitin proteasome (P-value=2.2 × 10−05) and Parkinson's disease pathways (P-value=3.6 × 10−05).