Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28231289›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

rEHR: An R package for manipulating and analysing Electronic Health Record data.

David A Springate, Rosa Parisi, Ivan Olier, David Reeves, Evangelos Kontopantelis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. PeerJ. Computer science · 2021
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Clinical Research Informatics: Contributions from 2017.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2018
    Review
  13. Review
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

5 authors.

David A SpringateNIHR School for Primary Care Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Rosa ParisiCentre for Pharmacoepidemiology & Drug Safety, Faculty of Biology, Medicine & Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Ivan OlierInformatics Research Centre, School of Computing Mathematics and Digital Technology, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom.
David ReevesNIHR School for Primary Care Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Evangelos KontopantelisNIHR School for Primary Care Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6450-5815

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_13042Medical Research Council MR/K006665/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research with structured Electronic Health Records (EHRs) is expanding as data becomes more accessible; analytic methods advance; and the scientific validity of such studies is increasingly accepted. However, data science methodology to enable the rapid searching/extraction, cleaning and analysis of these large, often complex, datasets is less well developed. In addition, commonly used software is inadequate, resulting in bottlenecks in research workflows and in obstacles to increased transparency and reproducibility of the research. Preparing a research-ready dataset from EHRs is a complex and time consuming task requiring substantial data science skills, even for simple designs. In addition, certain aspects of the workflow are computationally intensive, for example extraction of longitudinal data and matching controls to a large cohort, which may take days or even weeks to run using standard software. The rEHR package simplifies and accelerates the process of extracting ready-for-analysis datasets from EHR databases. It has a simple import function to a database backend that greatly accelerates data access times. A set of generic query functions allow users to extract data efficiently without needing detailed knowledge of SQL queries. Longitudinal data extractions can also be made in a single command, making use of parallel processing. The package also contains functions for cutting data by time-varying covariates, matching controls to cases, unit conversion and construction of clinical code lists. There are also functions to synthesise dummy EHR. The package has been tested with one for the largest primary care EHRs, the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), but allows for a common interface to other EHRs. This simplified and accelerated work flow for EHR data extraction results in simpler, cleaner scripts that are more easily debugged, shared and reproduced.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsDatabases, FactualHumansInformation Storage and RetrievalSoftwareTime FactorsWorkflow

Identifiers

PMID28231289
PMCPMC5323003

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.