Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37244628›Full record

GuidelineInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics2023

Operational Ontology for Oncology (O3): A Professional Society-Based, Multistakeholder, Consensus-Driven Informatics Standard Supporting Clinical and Research Use of Real-World Data From Patients Treated for Cancer.

Charles S Mayo, Mary U Feng, Kristy K Brock, Randi Kudner, Peter Balter, Jeffrey C Buchsbaum, Amanda Caissie, Elizabeth Covington, Emily C Daugherty, Andre L Dekker and 43 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readPractice Guideline
In one paragraph

Guideline in International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Technical Considerations on Proton Therapy in NRG's Multi-Institutional Clinical Trials.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2026
    Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Reirradiation practices of Radiation Therapists (RePoRT) study.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2025
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Improved Survival and Prognostication in Melanoma Patients With Brain Metastases: An Update of the Melanoma Graded Prognostic Assessment.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

53 authors at 20 institutions in 6 countries.

Charles S MayoUniversity of Michigan. Electronic address: cmayo@med.umich.edu.
Mary U FengUniversity of California, San Francisco.
Kristy K BrockMD Anderson Cancer Center.
Randi KudnerAmerican Society of Radiation Oncology.
Peter BalterMD Anderson Cancer Center.
Jeffrey C BuchsbaumNational Cancer Institute.
Amanda CaissieDalhousie University.
Elizabeth CovingtonUniversity of Michigan.
Emily C DaughertyUniversity of Cincinnati Medical Center.
Andre L DekkerMaastro Clinic.
Clifton D FullerMD Anderson Cancer Center.
Anneka L HallstromWellesley College.
David S HongUniversity of Southern California.
Julian C HongUniversity of California, San Francisco.
Sophia C KamranMassachusetts General Hospital.
Eva KatsoulakisJames A. Haley VA Medical Center.
John KildeaMcGill University.
Andra V KrauzeNational Institutes of Health.
Jon J KruseMayo Clinic.
Tod McNuttJohns Hopkins University.
Michelle MierzwaUniversity of Michigan.
Amy MorenoMD Anderson Cancer Center.
Jatinder R PaltaVirginia Commonwealth University.
Richard PoppleUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham.
Thomas G PurdiePrincess Margaret Cancer Center.
Susan RichardsonSwedish Cancer Institute.
Gregory C SharpMassachusetts General Hospital.
Shiraishi SatomiMayo Clinic.
Lawrence R TarboxUniversity of Arkansas.
Aradhana M VenkatesanMD Anderson Cancer Center.
Alon WitztumUniversity of California, San Francisco.
Kelly E WoodsUniversity of Southern California.
Yuan YaoUniversity of Michigan.
Keyvan FarahaniNational Cancer Institute.
Sanjay AnejaYale University.
Peter E GabrielUniversity of Pennsylvania.
Lubomire HadjiiskiUniversity of Michigan.
Dan RuanUniversity of California, Los Angeles.
Jeffrey H SiewerdsenJohns Hopkins University.
Steven BrattMITRE Corporation.
Michelle CasagniMITRE Corporation.
Su ChenMITRE Corporation.
John C ChristodouleasUniversity of Pennsylvania.
Anthony DiDonatoMITRE Corporation.
James HaymanUniversity of Michigan.
Rishhab KapoorVirginia Commonwealth University.
Saul KravitzMITRE Corporation.
Sharon SebastianMITRE Corporation.
Martin Von SiebenthalVarian Medical Systems.
Walter BoschWashington University in St. Louis.
Coen HurkmansCatharina Hospital Eindhoven.
Sue S YomUniversity of California, San Francisco.
Ying XiaoUniversity of Pennsylvania.
Mitre (United States) · USUniversity of Michigan · USScripps MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · USCalifornia University of Pennsylvania · USJohns Hopkins University · USMassachusetts General Hospital · USUniversity of Southern California · USVirginia Commonwealth University · USWinnMed · USAmerican Society for Radiation Oncology · USCancer Institute (WIA) · INDalhousie University · CAJames A. Haley Veterans' Hospital · USMaastro Clinic · NLMcGill University · CANational Institutes of Health · USRadboud University Nijmegen · NLUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · USUniversity of Arkansas at Fayetteville · US

Funding

IROC: Enhancing local enrolling site radiological data capture capabilities for NCTN trialsU24CA180803 · NCI · AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY · PI Thomas J. FitzGerald, MICHAEL V KNOPP · 2014 to 2026
$116.2M
Image Guided Cancer Therapy Training ProgramT32CA261856 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Kristy Brock, Clifton David Fuller · 2022 to 2026
$1.2M
Provider and Patient-generated Remote Oro-Dental Health Electronic Data Capture for Algorithmic Longitudinal Evaluation and Risk-Assessment (PROHEALER)K01DE030524 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI MORENO, AMY CATHERINE · 2022 to 2024
$479k
Radiation-specific Automated Dental Dose Distributions via Machine-learning based Mapping for Accurate Predictions of (Peri)odontal Problems (RADMAP)R21DE031082 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI MORENO, AMY CATHERINE · 2021 to 2022
$452k
NCI NIH HHS T32 CA261856NCI NIH HHS U24 CA180803NIDCR NIH HHS K01 DE030524NIDCR NIH HHS R21 DE031082
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe ongoing lack of data standardization severely undermines the potential for automated learning from the vast amount of information routinely archived in electronic health records (EHRs), radiation oncology information systems, treatment planning systems, and other cancer care and outcomes databases. We sought to create a standardized ontology for clinical data, social determinants of health, and other radiation oncology concepts and interrelationships. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The American Association of Physicists in Medicine's Big Data Science Committee was initiated in July 2019 to explore common ground from the stakeholders' collective experience of issues that typically compromise the formation of large inter- and intra-institutional databases from EHRs. The Big Data Science Committee adopted an iterative, cyclical approach to engaging stakeholders beyond its membership to optimize the integration of diverse perspectives from the community.

resultsWe developed the Operational Ontology for Oncology (O3), which identified 42 key elements, 359 attributes, 144 value sets, and 155 relationships ranked in relative importance of clinical significance, likelihood of availability in EHRs, and the ability to modify routine clinical processes to permit aggregation. Recommendations are provided for best use and development of the O3 to 4 constituencies: device manufacturers, centers of clinical care, researchers, and professional societies.

conclusionsO3 is designed to extend and interoperate with existing global infrastructure and data science standards. The implementation of these recommendations will lower the barriers for aggregation of information that could be used to create large, representative, findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable data sets to support the scientific objectives of grant programs. The construction of comprehensive "real-world" data sets and application of advanced analytical techniques, including artificial intelligence, holds the potential to revolutionize patient management and improve outcomes by leveraging increased access to information derived from larger, more representative data sets.

Indexed as

Biological OntologiesNeoplasmsRadiation OncologyArtificial IntelligenceHumansInformatics

Identifiers

PMID37244628
PMCPMC10741247
OpenAlexW4378379595

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.