ArticleHealthcare informatics research2021
Incorporation of Korean Electronic Data Interchange Vocabulary into Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Vocabulary.
Article in Healthcare informatics research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- A multidimensional hierarchical framework for sources of bias in real-world healthcare evidence: a scoping review.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2026Article
- Pretrained patient trajectories for adverse drug event prediction using common data model-based electronic health records.Communications medicine · 2025Article
- Advancing Medical Imaging Research Through Standardization: The Path to Rapid Development, Rigorous Validation, and Robust Reproducibility.Investigative radiology · 2025Review
- Scalable Infrastructure Supporting Reproducible Nationwide Healthcare Data Analysis toward FAIR Stewardship.Scientific data · 2023Article
- Common Data Model-based Analysis of Selective Leukoreduction Protocol Compliance at Three Hospitals.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2023Article
- Building the observational medical outcomes partnership's T-MSIS Analytic File common data model.Informatics in medicine unlocked · 2023Article
- Establishment of an International Evidence Sharing Network Through Common Data Model for Cardiovascular Research.Korean circulation journal · 2022Review
- Transforming Thyroid Cancer Diagnosis and Staging Information from Unstructured Reports to the Observational Medical Outcome Partnership Common Data Model.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Article
- Patient Factors Associated with Different Hospice Programs in Korea: Analyzing Healthcare Big Data.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Preliminary feasibility assessment of CDM-based active surveillance using current status of medical device data in medical records and OMOP-CDM.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Factors of Hospitals Associated With an Independent Hospice Care Unit: A Quantitative Empirical Study.Journal of hospice and palliative nursing : JHPN : the official journal of the Hospice and Palliative Nurses Association · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesWe incorporated the Korean Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) vocabulary into Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) vocabulary using a semi-automated process. The goal of this study was to improve the Korean EDI as a standard medical ontology in Korea.
methodsWe incorporated the EDI vocabulary into OMOP vocabulary through four main steps. First, we improved the current classification of EDI domains and separated medical services into procedures and measurements. Second, each EDI concept was assigned a unique identifier and validity dates. Third, we built a vertical hierarchy between EDI concepts, fully describing child concepts through relationships and attributes and linking them to parent terms. Finally, we added an English definition for each EDI concept. We translated the Korean definitions of EDI concepts using Google.Cloud.Translation.V3, using a client library and manual translation. We evaluated the EDI using 11 auditing criteria for controlled vocabularies.
resultsWe incorporated 313,431 concepts from the EDI to the OMOP Standardized Vocabularies. For 10 of the 11 auditing criteria, EDI showed a better quality index within the OMOP vocabulary than in the original EDI vocabulary.
conclusionsThe incorporation of the EDI vocabulary into the OMOP Standardized Vocabularies allows better standardization to facilitate network research. Our research provides a promising model for mapping Korean medical information into a global standard terminology system, although a comprehensive mapping of official vocabulary remains to be done in the future.
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.