Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36525430›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Mapping of UK Biobank clinical codes: Challenges and possible solutions.

Oleg Stroganov, Alena Fedarovich, Emily Wong, Yulia Skovpen, Elena Pakhomova, Ivan Grishagin, Dzmitry Fedarovich, Tania Khasanova, David Merberg, Sándor Szalma and 1 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Plasma protein-based and polygenic risk scores serve complementary roles in predicting inflammatory bowel disease.Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Oleg StroganovRancho BioSciences, LLC, San Diego, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-6190-823X
Alena FedarovichRancho BioSciences, LLC, San Diego, California, United States of America.
Emily WongTakeda Development Center Americas, Inc., San Diego, California, United States of America.
Yulia SkovpenRancho BioSciences, LLC, San Diego, California, United States of America.
Elena PakhomovaRancho BioSciences, LLC, San Diego, California, United States of America.
Ivan GrishaginRancho BioSciences, LLC, San Diego, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-2985-4336
Dzmitry FedarovichRancho BioSciences, LLC, San Diego, California, United States of America.
Tania KhasanovaRancho BioSciences, LLC, San Diego, California, United States of America.
David MerbergTakeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Sándor SzalmaTakeda Development Center Americas, Inc., San Diego, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7591-3902
Julie BryantRancho BioSciences, LLC, San Diego, California, United States of America.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_17228
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe UK Biobank provides a rich collection of longitudinal clinical data coming from different healthcare providers and sources in England, Wales, and Scotland. Although extremely valuable and available to a wide research community, the heterogeneous dataset contains inconsistent medical terminology that is either aligned to several ontologies within the same category or unprocessed. To make these data useful to a research community, data cleaning, curation, and standardization are needed. Significant efforts to perform data reformatting, mapping to any selected ontologies (such as SNOMED-CT) and harmonization are required from any data user to integrate UK Biobank hospital inpatient and self-reported data, data from various registers with primary care (GP) data. The integrated clinical data would provide a more comprehensive picture of one's medical history. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe evaluated several approaches to map GP clinical Read codes to International Classification of Diseases (ICD) and Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical Terms (SNOMED CT) terminologies. The results were compared, mapping inconsistencies were flagged, a quality category was assigned to each mapping to evaluate overall mapping quality.

resultsWe propose a curation and data integration pipeline for harmonizing diagnosis. We also report challenges identified in mapping Read codes from UK Biobank GP tables to ICD and SNOMED CT. DISCUSSION AND

conclusionSome of the challenges-the lack of precise one-to-one mapping between ontologies or the need for additional ontology to fully map terms-are general reflecting trade-offs to be made at different steps. Other challenges are due to automatic mapping and can be overcome by leveraging existing mappings, supplemented with automated and manual curation.

Indexed as

Biological Specimen BanksSystematized Nomenclature of MedicineHumansInternational Classification of DiseasesUnited KingdomVocabulary, Controlled

Identifiers

PMID36525430
PMCPMC9757572

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.