ReviewJournal of biomedical informatics2016
Current applications and future directions for the CDISC Operational Data Model standard: A methodological review.
Review in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influenza and other respiratory viruses: standardizing disease severity in surveillance and clinical trials.Expert review of anti-infective therapy · 2017Pooled it
- Recommendations for Successful Development and Implementation of Digital Health Technology Tools.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- What Next for the Science of Patient Preference? Interoperability, Standardization, and Transferability.The patient · 2025Review
- Using artificial intelligence and predictive modelling to enable learning healthcare systems (LHS) for pandemic preparedness.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Review
- Data Quality- and Utility-Compliant Anonymization of Common Data Model-Harmonized Electronic Health Record Data: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- NIH HEAL Clinical Data Elements (CDE) implementation: NIH HEAL Initiative IMPOWR network IDEA-CC.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2023Article
- Clinical Source Data Production and Quality Control in Real-world Studies: Proposal for Development of the eSource Record System.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Standardized Description of the Feature Extraction Process to Transform Raw Data Into Meaningful Information for Enhancing Data Reuse: Consensus Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2022Article
- Measuring Health-Related Quality of Life With Multimodal Data: Viewpoint.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- A Semi-Automated Term Harmonization Pipeline Applied to Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Clinical Trials.Methods of information in medicine · 2022Article
- The Fast Health Interoperability Resources (FHIR) Standard: Systematic Literature Review of Implementations, Applications, Challenges and Opportunities.JMIR medical informatics · 2021Review
- A National, Semantic-Driven, Three-Pillar Strategy to Enable Health Data Secondary Usage Interoperability for Research Within the Swiss Personalized Health Network: Methodological Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2021Article
- Prototypical Clinical Trial Registry Based on Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR): Design and Implementation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2021Article
- Enabling Agile Clinical and Translational Data Warehousing: Platform Development and Evaluation.JMIR medical informatics · 2020Article
- Evaluating the Coverage of the HL7AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2020Article
- Machine learning for comprehensive forecasting of Alzheimer's Disease progression.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Challenges to the Standardization of Trauma Data Collection in Burn, Traumatic Brain Injury, Spinal Cord Injury, and Other Trauma Populations: A Call for Common Data Elements for Acute and Longitudinal Trauma Databases.Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2019Article
- A beginner's guide to data stewardship and data sharing.Spinal cord · 2019Review
- Use of EHRs data for clinical research: Historical progress and current applications.Learning health systems · 2019Article
- CDISC SHARE, a Global, Cloud-based Resource of Machine-Readable CDISC Standards for Clinical and Translational Research.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionIn order to further advance research and development on the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC) Operational Data Model (ODM) standard, the existing research must be well understood. This paper presents a methodological review of the ODM literature. Specifically, it develops a classification schema to categorize the ODM literature according to how the standard has been applied within the clinical research data lifecycle. This paper suggests areas for future research and development that address ODM's limitations and capitalize on its strengths to support new trends in clinical research informatics.
methodsA systematic scan of the following databases was performed: (1) ABI/Inform, (2) ACM Digital, (3) AIS eLibrary, (4) Europe Central PubMed, (5) Google Scholar, (5) IEEE Xplore, (7) PubMed, and (8) ScienceDirect. A Web of Science citation analysis was also performed. The search term used on all databases was "CDISC ODM." The two primary inclusion criteria were: (1) the research must examine the use of ODM as an information system solution component, or (2) the research must critically evaluate ODM against a stated solution usage scenario. Out of 2686 articles identified, 266 were included in a title level review, resulting in 183 articles. An abstract review followed, resulting in 121 remaining articles; and after a full text scan 69 articles met the inclusion criteria.
resultsAs the demand for interoperability has increased, ODM has shown remarkable flexibility and has been extended to cover a broad range of data and metadata requirements that reach well beyond ODM's original use cases. This flexibility has yielded research literature that covers a diverse array of topic areas. A classification schema reflecting the use of ODM within the clinical research data lifecycle was created to provide a categorized and consolidated view of the ODM literature. The elements of the framework include: (1) EDC (Electronic Data Capture) and EHR (Electronic Health Record) infrastructure; (2) planning; (3) data collection; (4) data tabulations and analysis; and (5) study archival. The analysis reviews the strengths and limitations of ODM as a solution component within each section of the classification schema. This paper also identifies opportunities for future ODM research and development, including improved mechanisms for semantic alignment with external terminologies, better representation of the CDISC standards used end-to-end across the clinical research data lifecycle, improved support for real-time data exchange, the use of EHRs for research, and the inclusion of a complete study design.
conclusionsODM is being used in ways not originally anticipated, and covers a diverse array of use cases across the clinical research data lifecycle. ODM has been used as much as a study metadata standard as it has for data exchange. A significant portion of the literature addresses integrating EHR and clinical research data. The simplicity and readability of ODM has likely contributed to its success and broad implementation as a data and metadata standard. Keeping the core ODM model focused on the most fundamental use cases, while using extensions to handle edge cases, has kept the standard easy for developers to learn and use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.