Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34514354›Full record

ArticleJAMIA open2021

Transforming and evaluating electronic health record disease phenotyping algorithms using the OMOP common data model: a case study in heart failure.

Vaclav Papez, Maxim Moinat, Stefan Payralbe, Folkert W Asselbergs, R Thomas Lumbers, Harry Hemingway, Richard Dobson, Spiros Denaxas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMIA open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Using ontologies to facilitate healthcare process mining and analysis.Journal of intelligent information systems · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Transforming and evaluating the UK Biobank to the OMOP Common Data Model for COVID-19 research and beyond.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    Observational
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.

Vaclav PapezInstitute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK.
Maxim MoinatThe Hyve, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Stefan PayralbeThe Hyve, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Folkert W AsselbergsInstitute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1692-8669
R Thomas LumbersInstitute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9077-4741
Harry HemingwayInstitute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2279-0624
Richard DobsonInstitute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4224-9245
Spiros DenaxasInstitute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9612-7791

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_13041Medical Research Council MR/K006584/1Medical Research Council MR/S003754/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of the study was to transform a resource of linked electronic health records (EHR) to the OMOP common data model (CDM) and evaluate the process in terms of syntactic and semantic consistency and quality when implementing disease and risk factor phenotyping algorithms. MATERIALS AND

methodsUsing heart failure (HF) as an exemplar, we represented three national EHR sources (Clinical Practice Research Datalink, Hospital Episode Statistics Admitted Patient Care, Office for National Statistics) into the OMOP CDM 5.2. We compared the original and CDM HF patient population by calculating and presenting descriptive statistics of demographics, related comorbidities, and relevant clinical biomarkers.

resultsWe identified a cohort of 502 536 patients with the incident and prevalent HF and converted 1 099 195 384 rows of data from 216 581 914 encounters across three EHR sources to the OMOP CDM. The largest percentage (65%) of unmapped events was related to medication prescriptions in primary care. The average coverage of source vocabularies was >98% with the exception of laboratory tests recorded in primary care. The raw and transformed data were similar in terms of demographics and comorbidities with the largest difference observed being 3.78% in the prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

conclusionOur study demonstrated that the OMOP CDM can successfully be applied to convert EHR linked across multiple healthcare settings and represent phenotyping algorithms spanning multiple sources. Similar to previous research, challenges mapping primary care prescriptions and laboratory measurements still persist and require further work. The use of OMOP CDM in national UK EHR is a valuable research tool that can enable large-scale reproducible observational research.

Indexed as

algorithmsEHRheart failureOMOPphenotyping

Identifiers

PMID34514354
PMCPMC8423424

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.