Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26893951›Full record

ArticleHealthcare informatics research2016

Conversion and Data Quality Assessment of Electronic Health Record Data at a Korean Tertiary Teaching Hospital to a Common Data Model for Distributed Network Research.

Dukyong Yoon, Eun Kyoung Ahn, Man Young Park, Soo Yeon Cho, Patrick Ryan, Martijn J Schuemie, Dahye Shin, Hojun Park, Rae Woong Park

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare informatics research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Dukyong YoonDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea.; Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics, New York, NY, USA.
Eun Kyoung AhnObservational Health Data Sciences and Informatics, New York, NY, USA.; Department of Nursing Science, Dongyang University, Yeongju, Korea.
Man Young ParkObservational Health Data Sciences and Informatics, New York, NY, USA.; Mibyeong Research Center, Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine, Daejeon, Korea.
Soo Yeon ChoDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea.
Patrick RyanObservational Health Data Sciences and Informatics, New York, NY, USA.; Global Epidemiology, Janssen Research and Development LLC, Titusville, NJ, USA.
Martijn J SchuemieObservational Health Data Sciences and Informatics, New York, NY, USA.; Global Epidemiology, Janssen Research and Development LLC, Titusville, NJ, USA.
Dahye ShinDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea.
Hojun ParkDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea.
Rae Woong ParkDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea.; Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesA distributed research network (DRN) has the advantages of improved statistical power, and it can reveal more significant relationships by increasing sample size. However, differences in data structure constitute a major barrier to integrating data among DRN partners. We describe our experience converting Electronic Health Records (EHR) to the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) Common Data Model (CDM).

methodsWe transformed the EHR of a hospital into Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) CDM ver. 4.0 used in OHDSI. All EHR codes were mapped and converted into the standard vocabulary of the CDM. All data required by the CDM were extracted, transformed, and loaded (ETL) into the CDM structure. To validate and improve the quality of the transformed dataset, the open-source data characterization program ACHILLES was run on the converted data.

resultsPatient, drug, condition, procedure, and visit data from 2.07 million patients who visited the subject hospital from July 1994 to November 2014 were transformed into the CDM. The transformed dataset was named the AUSOM. ACHILLES revealed 36 errors and 13 warnings in the AUSOM. We reviewed and corrected 28 errors. The summarized results of the AUSOM processed with ACHILLES are available at http://ami.ajou.ac.kr:8080/.

conclusionsWe successfully converted our EHRs to a CDM and were able to participate as a data partner in an international DRN. Converting local records in this manner will provide various opportunities for researchers and data holders.

Indexed as

Clinical CodingCommon Data ModelElectronic Health RecordsEpidemiologic MethodsObservational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI)

Identifiers

PMID26893951
PMCPMC4756059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.