ArticleJournal of biomedical informatics2021
Phenotyping coronavirus disease 2019 during a global health pandemic: Lessons learned from the characterization of an early cohort.
Article in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The phenotype-genotype reference map: Improving biobank data science through replication.American journal of human genetics · 2023Article
- Novel informatics approaches to COVID-19 Research: From methods to applications.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2022Article
- Subphenotyping of Mexican Patients With COVID-19 at Preadmission To Anticipate Severity Stratification: Age-Sex Unbiased Meta-Clustering Technique.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2022Article
- DrugWAS: Drug-wide Association Studies for COVID-19 Drug Repurposing.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2021Article
- Real-World Evidence of COVID-19 Patients' Data Quality in the Electronic Health Records.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
From the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, researchers have looked to electronic health record (EHR) data as a way to study possible risk factors and outcomes. To ensure the validity and accuracy of research using these data, investigators need to be confident that the phenotypes they construct are reliable and accurate, reflecting the healthcare settings from which they are ascertained. We developed a COVID-19 registry at a single academic medical center and used data from March 1 to June 5, 2020 to assess differences in population-level characteristics in pandemic and non-pandemic years respectively. Median EHR length, previously shown to impact phenotype performance in type 2 diabetes, was significantly shorter in the SARS-CoV-2 positive group relative to a 2019 influenza tested group (median 3.1 years vs 8.7; Wilcoxon rank sum P = 1.3e-52). Using three phenotyping methods of increasing complexity (billing codes alone and domain-specific algorithms provided by an EHR vendor and clinical experts), common medical comorbidities were abstracted from COVID-19 EHRs, defined by the presence of a positive laboratory test (positive predictive value 100%, recall 93%). After combining performance data across phenotyping methods, we observed significantly lower false negative rates for those records billed for a comprehensive care visit (p = 4e-11) and those with complete demographics data recorded (p = 7e-5). In an early COVID-19 cohort, we found that phenotyping performance of nine common comorbidities was influenced by median EHR length, consistent with previous studies, as well as by data density, which can be measured using portable metrics including CPT codes. Here we present those challenges and potential solutions to creating deeply phenotyped, acute COVID-19 cohorts.
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.