Search

PurposeRoutinely collected real world data (RWD) have great utility in aiding the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic response. Here we present the international Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) Characterizing Health Associated Risks and Your Baseline Disease In SARS-COV-2 (CHARYBDIS) framework for standardisation and analysis of COVID-19 RWD.Patients and methodsWe conducted a descriptive retrospective database study using a federated network of data partners in the United States, Europe (the Netherlands, Spain, the UK, Germany, France and Italy) and Asia (South Korea and China). The study protocol and analytical package were released on 11th June 2020 and are iteratively updated via GitHub. We identified three non-mutually exclusive cohorts of 4,537,153 individuals with a clinical COVID-19 diagnosis or positive test, 886,193 hospitalized with COVID-19, and 113,627 hospitalized with COVID-19 requiring intensive services.ResultsWe aggregated over 22,000 unique characteristics describing patients with COVID-19. All comorbidities, symptoms, medications, and outcomes are described by cohort in aggregate counts and are readily available online. Globally, we observed similarities in the USA and Europe: more women diagnosed than men but more men hospitalized than women, most diagnosed cases between 25 and 60 years of age versus most hospitalized cases between 60 and 80 years of age. South Korea differed with more women than men hospitalized. Common comorbidities included type 2 diabetes, hypertension, chronic kidney disease and heart disease. Common presenting symptoms were dyspnea, cough and fever. Symptom data availability was more common in hospitalized cohorts than diagnosed.ConclusionWe constructed a global, multi-centre view to describe trends in COVID-19 progression, management and evolution over time. By characterising baseline variability in patients and geography, our work provides critical context that may otherwise be misconstrued as data quality issues. This is important as we perform studies on adverse events of special interest in COVID-19 vaccine surveillance.

Life course research embraces the complexity of health and disease development, tackling the extensive interactions between genetics and environment. This interdisciplinary blueprint, or theoretical framework, offers a structure for research ideas and specifies relationships between related factors. Traditionally, methodological approaches attempt to reduce the complexity of these dynamic interactions and decompose health into component parts, ignoring the complex reciprocal interaction of factors that shape health over time. New methods that match the epistemological foundation of the life course framework are needed to fully explore adaptive, multilevel, and reciprocal interactions between individuals and their environment. The focus of this article is to (1) delineate the differences between lifespan and life course research, (2) articulate the importance of complex systems science as a methodological framework in the life course research toolbox to guide our research questions, (3) raise key questions that can be asked within the clinical and translational science domain utilizing this framework, and (4) provide recommendations for life course research implementation, charting the way forward. Recent advances in computational analytics, computer science, and data collection could be used to approximate, measure, and analyze the intertwining and dynamic nature of genetic and environmental factors involved in health development.

Life course research embraces the complexity of health and disease development, tackling the extensive interactions between genetics and environment. This interdisciplinary blueprint, or theoretical framework, offers a structure for research ideas and specifies relationships between related factors. Traditionally, methodological approaches attempt to reduce the complexity of these dynamic interactions and decompose health into component parts, ignoring the complex reciprocal interaction of factors that shape health over time. New methods that match the epistemological foundation of the life course framework are needed to fully explore adaptive, multilevel, and reciprocal interactions between individuals and their environment. The focus of this article is to (1) delineate the differences between lifespan and life course research, (2) articulate the importance of complex systems science as a methodological framework in the life course research toolbox to guide our research questions, (3) raise key questions that can be asked within the clinical and translational science domain utilizing this framework, and (4) provide recommendations for life course research implementation, charting the way forward. Recent advances in computational analytics, computer science, and data collection could be used to approximate, measure, and analyze the intertwining and dynamic nature of genetic and environmental factors involved in health development.

Objective Surgical outcome prediction is challenging but necessary for postoperative management. Current machine learning models utilize pre- and post-op data, excluding intraoperative information in surgical notes. Current models also usually predict binary outcomes even when surgeries have multiple outcomes that require different postoperative management. This study addresses these gaps by incorporating intraoperative information into multimodal models for multiclass glaucoma surgery outcome prediction. Materials and methods We developed and evaluated multimodal deep learning models for multiclass glaucoma trabeculectomy surgery outcomes using both structured EHR data and free-text operative notes. We compare those to baseline models that use structured EHR data exclusively, or neural network models that leverage only operative notes. Results The multimodal neural network had the highest performance with a macro AUROC of 0.750 and F1 score of 0.583. It outperformed the baseline machine learning model with structured EHR data alone (macro AUROC of 0.712 and F1 score of 0.486). Additionally, the multimodal model achieved the highest recall (0.692) for hypotony surgical failure, while the surgical success group had the highest precision (0.884) and F1 score (0.775). Discussion This study shows that operative notes are an important source of predictive information. The multimodal predictive model combining perioperative notes and structured pre- and post-op EHR data outperformed other models. Multiclass surgical outcome prediction can provide valuable insights for clinical decision-making. Conclusions Our results show the potential of deep learning models to enhance clinical decision-making for postoperative management. They can be applied to other specialties to improve surgical outcome predictions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study was to collect and synthesize evidence regarding data quality problems encountered when working with variables related to social determinants of health (SDoH).Materials and Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the literature on social determinants research and data quality and then iteratively identified themes in the literature using a content analysis process.Results: The most commonly represented quality issue associated with SDoH data is plausibility (n = 31, 41%). Factors related to race and ethnicity have the largest body of literature (n = 40, 53%). The first theme, noted in 62% (n = 47) of articles, is that bias or validity issues often result from data quality problems. The most frequently identified validity issue is misclassification bias (n = 23, 30%). The second theme is that many of the articles suggest methods for mitigating the issues resulting from poor social determinants data quality. We grouped these into 5 suggestions: avoid complete case analysis, impute data, rely on multiple sources, use validated software tools, and select addresses thoughtfully.Discussion: The type of data quality problem varies depending on the variable, and each problem is associated with particular forms of analytical error. Problems encountered with the quality of SDoH data are rarely distributed randomly. Data from Hispanic patients are more prone to issues with plausibility and misclassification than data from other racial/ethnic groups.Conclusion: Consideration of data quality and evidence-based quality improvement methods may help prevent bias and improve the validity of research conducted with SDoH data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background To demonstrate that subject selection based on sufficient laboratory results and medication orders in electronic health records can be biased towards sick patients. Methods Using electronic health record data from 10,000 patients who received anesthetic services at a major metropolitan tertiary care academic medical center, an affiliated hospital for women and children, and an affiliated urban primary care hospital, the correlation between patient health status and counts of days with laboratory results or medication orders, as indicated by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification (ASA Class), was assessed with a Negative Binomial Regression model. Results Higher ASA Class was associated with more points of data: compared to ASA Class 1 patients, ASA Class 4 patients had 5.05 times the number of days with laboratory results and 6.85 times the number of days with medication orders, controlling for age, sex, emergency status, admission type, primary diagnosis, and procedure. Conclusions Imposing data sufficiency requirements for subject selection allows researchers to minimize missing data when reusing electronic health records for research, but introduces a bias towards the selection of sicker patients. We demonstrated the relationship between patient health and quantity of data, which may result in a systematic bias towards the selection of sicker patients for research studies and limit the external validity of research conducted using electronic health record data. Additionally, we discovered other variables (i.e., admission status, age, emergency classification, procedure, and diagnosis) that independently affect data sufficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medical scribes have become a widely used strategy to optimize how providers document in the electronic health record. To date, literature regarding the impact of scribes on time to complete documentation is limited. We conducted a retrospective, descriptive study of chart completion time among providers using scribes at our organization. A total of 148,410 scribed encounters, across 55 different clinics, were analyzed to determine variations in chart completion time. There was a significant variance in completion time between specialty groups and clinics within each specialty. Additionally, chart completion time was highly variable between providers working in the same clinic. These patterns were observed across all specialties included in our analysis. Our results suggest a higher level of variability with respect to chart completion when utilizing scribes than previously anticipated., (©2021 AMIA - All rights reserved.)

Deficiencies in data sharing capabilities limit Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) analysis as part of COVID-19 research. The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) is an example of an Electronic Health Record (EHR) database of patients tested for COVID-19 that could benefit from a SDoH elements framework that captures various screening instruments in EHR data warehouse systems. This paper uses the University of Washington Enterprise Data Warehouse (a data contributor to N3C) to demonstrate how SDoH can be represented and managed to be made available within an OMOP common data model. We found that these data varied by type of social determinants data and where it was collected, in the time period that it was collected, and in how it was represented., (©2021 AMIA - All rights reserved.)

Errors and incompleteness in electronic health record (EHR) medication lists can result in medical errors. To reduce errors in these medication lists, clinicians use patient self-reported data to reconcile EHR data. We assessed the agreement between patient self-reported medications and medications recorded in the EHR for six medication classes related to cardiovascular care and used logistic regression models to determine which patient-related factors were associated with the disagreement between these two information sources. From our 297 patients, we found self-reported medications had an overall above-average agreement with the EHR (? = .727). We observed the highest agreement level for statins (? = .831) and the lowest for other antihypertensives (? = .465). Agreement was less likely for Hispanic and male patients. We also performed an in-depth error analysis of different types of disagreement beyond medication names, which revealed that the most frequent type of disagreement was mismatched dosages., (©2021 AMIA - All rights reserved.)

Structured electronic health record (EHR) data are often used for quality measurement and improvement, clinical research, and other secondary uses. These data, however, are known to suffer from quality problems. There may be value in augmenting structured EHR data to improve data quality, thereby improving the reliability and validity of the conclusions drawn from those data. Focusing on five diagnoses related to cardiovascular care, this paper considers the added value of two alternative data sources: manual chart abstraction and patient self-report. We assess the overall agreement between structured EHR problem list data, abstracted EHR data, and patient self- report; and explore possible causes of disagreement between those sources. Our findings suggest that both chart abstraction and patient self-report contain significantly more diagnoses than the problem list, but that the information they capture is different. Methods for collecting and validating self-reported medical data require further consideration and exploration., (©2019 AMIA - All rights reserved.)

Clinical quality measures (CQMs) aim to identify gaps in care and to promote evidence-based guidelines. Official CQM definitions consist of a measure's logic and grouped, standardized codes to define key concepts. In this study, we used the official CQM update process to understand how CQMs' meanings change over time. First, we identified differences between the narrative description, logic, and the vocabulary specifications offour standardized CQMs' definitions in subsequent versions (2015, 2016, and 2017). Next, we implemented the various versions in a quality measure calculation registry to understand how the differences affected calculated prevalence of risk and measure performance. Global performance rates changed up to 5.32%, and an increase of up to 28% new patients was observed for key conditions between versions. Updates to definitions that change a measure's logic and choices to include/exclude codes in value set vocabularies changes measurement of quality and likely introduces variation by implementation.

Objective: To understand the impact of distinct concept to value set mapping on the measurement of quality of care., Background: Clinical quality measures (CQMs) intend to measure the quality of healthcare services provided, and to help promote evidence-based therapies. Most CQMs consist of grouped codes from vocabularies - or 'value sets' - that represent the unique identifiers (i.e., object identifiers), concepts (i.e., value set names), and concept definitions (i.e., code groups) that define a measure's specifications. In the development of a statin therapy CQM, two unique value sets were created by independent measure developers for the same global concepts., Methods: We first identified differences between the two value set specifications of the same CQM. We then implemented the various versions in a quality measure calculation registry to understand how the differences affected calculated prevalence of risk and measure performance., Results: Global performance rates only differed by 0.8%, but there were up to 2.3 times as many patients included with key conditions, and differing performance rates of 7.5% for patients with 'myocardial infarction' and 3.5% for those with 'ischemic vascular disease'., Conclusion: The decisions CQM developers make about which concepts and code groups to include or exclude in value set vocabularies can lead to inaccuracies in the measurement of quality of care. One solution is that developers could provide rationale for these decisions. Endorsements are needed to encourage system vendors, payers, informaticians, and clinicians to collaborate in the creation of more integrated terminology sets.

Objective: To measure variation among four different Electronic Health Record (EHR) system documentation locations versus 'gold standard' manual chart review for risk stratification in patients with multiple chronic illnesses., Methods: Adults seen in primary care with EHR evidence of at least one of 13 conditions were included. EHRs were manually reviewed to determine presence of active diagnoses, and risk scores were calculated using three different methodologies and five EHR documentation locations. Claims data were used to assess cost and utilization for the following year. Descriptive and diagnostic statistics were calculated for each EHR location. Criterion validity testing compared the gold standard verified diagnoses versus other EHR locations and risk scores in predicting future cost and utilization., Results: Nine hundred patients had 2,179 probable diagnoses. About 70% of the diagnoses from the EHR were verified by gold standard. For a subset of patients having baseline and prediction year data (n=750), modeling showed that the gold standard was the best predictor of outcomes on average for a subset of patients that had these data. However, combining all data sources together had nearly equivalent performance for prediction as the gold standard., Conclusions: EHR data locations were inaccurate 30% of the time, leading to improvement in overall modeling from a gold standard from chart review for individual diagnoses. However, the impact on identification of the highest risk patients was minor, and combining data from different EHR locations was equivalent to gold standard performance. The reviewer's ability to identify a diagnosis as correct was influenced by a variety of factors, including completeness, temporality, and perceived accuracy of chart data.

Clinical quality measures (CQMs) are important tools for the assessment and improvement of health care quality. Federal requirements initially set forth in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and advanced in subsequent stages of the requirements, codified electronic health record (EHR)-based CQM reporting, and have made automated CQM implementation a priority amongst the clinical and informatics communities. Nevertheless, the processes surrounding CQM implementation and validation remain complex, time-consuming, and largely undefined. We collected issue-tracking data during the course of an agile and rigorous collaborative project to build an analytics platform for the Knight Cardiovascular Institute at OHSU, with nine heart failure CQMs defined by the American College of Cardiology (ACC) as an exemplar. Using a mixed methods approach we provide an overview of our CQM implementation and validation process, identify major roadblocks and bottlenecks, and make recommendations for other professionals working in the area of health care quality assessment and improvement.

As interest in the reuse of electronic health record (EHR) data for research purposes grows, so too does awareness of the significant data quality problems in these non-traditional datasets. In the past, however, little attention has been paid to whether poor data quality merely introduces noise into EHR-derived datasets, or if there is potential for the creation of spurious signals and bias. In this study we use EHR data to demonstrate a statistically significant relationship between EHR completeness and patient health status, indicating that records with more data are likely to be more representative of sick patients than healthy ones, and therefore may not reflect the broader population found within the EHR.

The scarcity of cost-effective patient identification methods represents a significant barrier to clinical research. Research recruitment alerts have been designed to facilitate physician referrals but limited support is available to clinical researchers. We conducted a retrospective data analysis to evaluate the efficacy of a real-time patient identification alert delivered to clinical research coordinators recruiting for a clinical prospective cohort study. Data from log analysis and informal interviews with coordinators were triangulated. Over a 12-month period, 11,295 were screened electronically, 1,449 were interviewed, and 282 were enrolled. The enrollment rates for the alert and two other conventional methods were 4.65%, 2.01%, and 1.34% respectively. A taxonomy of eligibility status was proposed to precisely categorize research patients. Practical ineligibility factors were identified and their correlation with age and gender were analyzed. We conclude that the automatic prescreening alert improves screening efficiency and is an effective aid to clinical research coordinators.