Search

Aims With the ageing European population, the incidence of coronary artery disease (CAD) is expected to rise. This will likely result in an increased imaging use. Symptom recognition can be complicated, as symptoms caused by CAD can be atypical, particularly in women. Early CAD exclusion may help to optimize use of diagnostic resources and thus improve the sustainability of the healthcare system. To develop sex-stratified algorithms, trained on routinely available electronic health records (EHRs), raw electrocardiograms, and haematology data to exclude CAD in patients upfront. Methods and results We trained XGBoost algorithms on data from patients from the Utrecht Patient-Oriented Database, who underwent coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), and/or stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging, or stress single-photon emission computerized tomography (SPECT) in the UMC Utrecht. Outcomes were extracted from radiology reports. We aimed to maximize negative predictive value (NPV) to minimize the false negative risk with acceptable specificity. Of 6808 CCTA patients (31% female), 1029 females (48%) and 1908 males (45%) had no diagnosis of CAD. Of 3053 CMR/SPECT patients (45% female), 650 females (47%) and 881 males (48%) had no diagnosis of CAD. On the train and test set, the CCTA models achieved NPVs and specificities of 0.95 and 0.19 (females) and 0.96 and 0.09 (males). The CMR/SPECT models achieved NPVs and specificities of 0.75 and 0.041 (females) and 0.92 and 0.026 (males). Conclusion Coronary artery disease can be excluded from EHRs with high NPV. Our study demonstrates new possibilities to reduce unnecessary imaging in women and men suspected of CAD.

Background The new concept of difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis (D2T RA) refers to RA patients who remain symptomatic after several lines of treatment, resulting in a high patient and economic burden. During a hackathon, we aimed to identify and predict D2T RA patients in structured and unstructured routine care data. Methods Routine care data of 1873 RA patients were extracted from the Utrecht Patient Oriented Database. Data from a previous cross-sectional study, in which 152 RA patients were clinically classified as either D2T or non-D2T, served as a validation set. Machine learning techniques, text mining, and feature importance analyses were performed to identify and predict D2T RA patients based on structured and unstructured routine care data. Results We identified 123 potentially new D2T RA patients by applying the D2T RA definition in structured and unstructured routine care data. Additionally, we developed a D2T RA identification model derived from a feature importance analysis of all available structured data (AUC-ROC 0.88 (95% CI 0.82–0.94)), and we demonstrated the potential of longitudinal hematological data to differentiate D2T from non-D2T RA patients using supervised dimension reduction. Lastly, using data up to the time of starting the first biological treatment, we predicted future development of D2TRA (AUC-ROC 0.73 (95% CI 0.71–0.75)). Conclusions During this hackathon, we have demonstrated the potential of different techniques for the identification and prediction of D2T RA patients in structured as well as unstructured routine care data. The results are promising and should be optimized and validated in future research.

UNSTRUCTURED Electronic health records (EHRs) entail valuable data for re-use in science, quality evaluations, and clinical decision support. As routinely obtained laboratory data is abundantly present, often numeric, generated by certified laboratories and stored in a structured way, one may assume that it is immediately fit for (re-)use in research. However, behind each test result lies an extensive context of choices and considerations, made by both humans and machines, that introduces hidden patterns in the data. If unaware, researchers re-using routine laboratory data may eventually draw incorrect conclusions. After discussing healthcare system characteristics on macro- and microlevel, we introduce the reader to hidden aspects of generating structured routine laboratory data in four steps (ordering, pre-analysis, analysis, and post-analysis) and explain how each of these four steps may interfere with re-use of routine laboratory data. As researchers re-using these data, we underline the importance of domain knowledge of the healthcare professional, laboratory specialist, data manager, and patient, to turn routine laboratory data into meaningful datasets to help obtain relevant insights that create value for clinical care.

Electronic health records (EHRs) contain valuable data for reuse in science, quality evaluations, and clinical decision support. Because routinely obtained laboratory data are abundantly present, often numeric, generated by certified laboratories, and stored in a structured way, one may assume that they are immediately fit for (re)use in research. However, behind each test result lies an extensive context of choices and considerations, made by both humans and machines, that introduces hidden patterns in the data. If they are unaware, researchers reusing routine laboratory data may eventually draw incorrect conclusions. In this paper, after discussing health care system characteristics on both the macro and micro level, we introduce the reader to hidden aspects of generating structured routine laboratory data in 4 steps (ordering, preanalysis, analysis, and postanalysis) and explain how each of these steps may interfere with the reuse of routine laboratory data. As researchers reusing these data, we underline the importance of domain knowledge of the health care professional, laboratory specialist, data manager, and patient to turn routine laboratory data into meaningful data sets to help obtain relevant insights that create value for clinical care.