ArticleJMIR medical informatics2023
Assessing the Use of German Claims Data Vocabularies for Research in the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model: Development and Evaluation Study.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Experiences With Integrating Medical Terminologies Into User Interfaces for a Decision Support System for Primary Care: Conceptual and Development Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- A dataset for mapping the Japanese drugs to RxNorm standard concepts.Data in brief · 2025Article
- Article
- Mapping Drug Terms via Integration of a Retrieval-Augmented Generation Algorithm with a Large Language Model.Healthcare informatics research · 2024Article
- Implementation of the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Model in Electronic Medical Record Systems: Evaluation Study Using Factor Analysis and Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory-Best-Worst Methods.JMIR medical informatics · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence-enhanced patient evaluation: bridging art and science.European heart journal · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: National classifications and terminologies already routinely used for documentation within patient care settings enable the unambiguous representation of clinical information. However, the diversity of different vocabularies across health care institutions and countries is a barrier to achieving semantic interoperability and exchanging data across sites. The Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM) enables the standardization of structure and medical terminology. It allows the mapping of national vocabularies into so-called standard concepts, representing normative expressions for international analyses and research. Within our project "Hybrid Quality Indicators Using Machine Learning Methods" (Hybrid-QI), we aim to harmonize source codes used in German claims data vocabularies that are currently unavailable in the OMOP CDM. Objective: This study aims to increase the coverage of German vocabularies in the OMOP CDM. We aim to completely transform the source codes used in German claims data into the OMOP CDM without data loss and make German claims data usable for OMOP CDM-based research. Methods: To prepare the missing German vocabularies for the OMOP CDM, we defined a vocabulary preparation approach consisting of the identification of all codes of the corresponding vocabularies, their assembly into machine-readable tables, and the translation of German designations into English. Furthermore, we used 2 proposed approaches for OMOP-compliant vocabulary preparation: the mapping to standard concepts using the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) tool Usagi and the preparation of new 2-billion concepts (ie, concept_id >2 billion). Finally, we evaluated the prepared vocabularies regarding completeness and correctness using synthetic German claims data and calculated the coverage of German claims data vocabularies in the OMOP CDM. Results: Our vocabulary preparation approach was able to map 3 missing German vocabularies to standard concepts and prepare 8 vocabularies as new 2-billion concepts. The completeness evaluation showed that the prepared vocabularies cover 44.3% (3288/7417) of the source codes contained in German claims data. The correctness evaluation revealed that the specified validity periods in the OMOP CDM are compliant for the majority (705,531/706,032, 99.9%) of source codes and associated dates in German claims data. The calculation of the vocabulary coverage showed a noticeable decrease of missing vocabularies from 55% (11/20) to 10% (2/20) due to our preparation approach. Conclusions: By preparing 10 vocabularies, we showed that our approach is applicable to any type of vocabulary used in a source data set. The prepared vocabularies are currently limited to German vocabularies, which can only be used in national OMOP CDM research projects, because the mapping of new 2-billion concepts to standard concepts is missing. To participate in international OHDSI network studies with German claims data, future work is required to map the prepared 2-billion concepts to standard concepts.
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.