Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32852280›Full record

ReviewJMIR formative research2020

What You Need to Know Before Implementing a Clinical Research Data Warehouse: Comparative Review of Integrated Data Repositories in Health Care Institutions.

Kristina K Gagalova, M Angelica Leon Elizalde, Elodie Portales-Casamar, Matthias Görges

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR formative research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing 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

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Clinical Data Warehousing: A Scoping Review.Journal of the Society for Clinical Data Management · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

4 authors.

Kristina K GagalovaCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences Centre, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5975-0805
M Angelica Leon ElizaldeResearch Institute, BC Children's Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8346-8490
Elodie Portales-CasamarResearch Institute, BC Children's Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9998-7858
Matthias GörgesResearch Institute, BC Children's Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2193-178X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntegrated data repositories (IDRs), also referred to as clinical data warehouses, are platforms used for the integration of several data sources through specialized analytical tools that facilitate data processing and analysis. IDRs offer several opportunities for clinical data reuse, and the number of institutions implementing an IDR has grown steadily in the past decade.

objectiveThe architectural choices of major IDRs are highly diverse and determining their differences can be overwhelming. This review aims to explore the underlying models and common features of IDRs, provide a high-level overview for those entering the field, and propose a set of guiding principles for small- to medium-sized health institutions embarking on IDR implementation.

methodsWe reviewed manuscripts published in peer-reviewed scientific literature between 2008 and 2020, and selected those that specifically describe IDR architectures. Of 255 shortlisted articles, we found 34 articles describing 29 different architectures. The different IDRs were analyzed for common features and classified according to their data processing and integration solution choices.

resultsDespite common trends in the selection of standard terminologies and data models, the IDRs examined showed heterogeneity in the underlying architecture design. We identified 4 common architecture models that use different approaches for data processing and integration. These different approaches were driven by a variety of features such as data sources, whether the IDR was for a single institution or a collaborative project, the intended primary data user, and purpose (research-only or including clinical or operational decision making).

conclusionsIDR implementations are diverse and complex undertakings, which benefit from being preceded by an evaluation of requirements and definition of scope in the early planning stage. Factors such as data source diversity and intended users of the IDR influence data flow and synchronization, both of which are crucial factors in IDR architecture planning.

Indexed as

data aggregationdata analyticsdatabasedata warehousinghealth informaticsinformation storage and retrieval

Identifiers

PMID32852280
PMCPMC7484778

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.