Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30094285›Full record

ArticleEGEMS (Washington, DC)2018

Architecture and Implementation of a Clinical Research Data Warehouse for Prostate Cancer.

Martin G Seneviratne, Tina Seto, Douglas W Blayney, James D Brooks, Tina Hernandez-Boussard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EGEMS (Washington, DC), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Leveraging Digital Data to Inform and Improve Quality Cancer Care.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2020
    Article
  16. Insights from Adopting a Data Commons Approach for Large-scale Observational Cohort Studies: The California Teachers Study.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2020
    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

5 authors.

Martin G SeneviratneDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Stanford University, US.
Tina SetoSchool of Medicine Research Information Technology, Stanford University, US.
Douglas W BlayneyStanford Cancer Institute, Department of Medicine, Stanford University, US.
James D BrooksDepartment of Urology, Stanford University, US.
Tina Hernandez-BoussardDepartment of Medicine, Biomedical Informatics, Stanford University, US.

Funding

Utilizing Electronic Health Records to Measure and Improve Prostate Cancer CareR01CA183962 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI HERNANDEZ-BOUSSARD, TINA · 2015 to 2019
$3.1M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA183962
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElectronic health record (EHR) based research in oncology can be limited by missing data and a lack of structured data elements. Clinical research data warehouses for specific cancer types can enable the creation of more robust research cohorts.

methodsWe linked data from the Stanford University EHR with the Stanford Cancer Institute Research Database (SCIRDB) and the California Cancer Registry (CCR) to create a research data warehouse for prostate cancer. The database was supplemented with information from clinical trials, natural language processing of clinical notes and surveys on patient-reported outcomes.

results11,898 unique prostate cancer patients were identified in the Stanford EHR, of which 3,936 were matched to the Stanford cancer registry and 6153 in the CCR. 7158 patients with EHR data and at least one of SCIRDB and CCR data were initially included in the warehouse.

conclusionsA disease-specific clinical research data warehouse combining multiple data sources can facilitate secondary data use and enhance observational research in oncology.

Indexed as

Data CollectionElectronic Health RecordsQuality Improvement

Identifiers

PMID30094285
PMCPMC6078122

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.