Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29854228›Full record

ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2017

Secondary Use of Patients' Electronic Records (SUPER): An Approach for Meeting Specific Data Needs of Clinical and Translational Researchers.

Evan T Sholle, Joseph Kabariti, Stephen B Johnson, John P Leonard, Jyotishman Pathak, Vinay I Varughese, Curtis L Cole, Thomas R Campion

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
–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

40 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. LinkingLearning health systems · 2025
    Article
  5. Validation of theCirculation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. COVID-19 Severity and Outcomes in Patients With Cancer: A Matched Cohort Study.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2020
    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

8 authors.

Evan T SholleInformation Technologies and Services Department, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.
Joseph KabaritiInformation Technologies and Services Department, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.
Stephen B JohnsonDepartment of Healthcare Policy and Research, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.
John P LeonardDepartment of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.
Jyotishman PathakDepartment of Healthcare Policy and Research, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.
Vinay I VarugheseInformation Technologies and Services Department, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.
Curtis L ColeInformation Technologies and Services Department, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.
Thomas R CampionInformation Technologies and Services Department, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.

Funding

Clinical and Translational Science CenterUL1TR000457 · NCATS · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI IMPERATO-MCGINLEY, JULIANNE L · 2012 to 2016
$46.0M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000457
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Academic medical centers commonly approach secondary use of electronic health record (EHR) data by implementing centralized clinical data warehouses (CDWs). However, CDWs require extensive resources to model data dimensions and harmonize clinical terminology, which can hinder effective support of the specific and varied data needs of investigators. We hypothesized that an approach that aggregates raw data from source systems, ignores initial modeling typical of CDWs, and transforms raw data for specific research purposes would meet investigator needs. The approach has successfully enabled multiple tools that provide utility to the institutional research enterprise. To our knowledge, this is the first complete description of a methodology for electronic patient data acquisition and provisioning that ignores data harmonization at the time of initial storage in favor of downstream transformation to address specific research questions and applications.

Indexed as

Data AggregationData WarehousingElectronic Health RecordsTranslational Research, BiomedicalAcademic Medical CentersClinical Studies as TopicData MiningHumansInformation SystemsNew York CitySystems Integration

Identifiers

PMID29854228
PMCPMC5977622

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.