Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37952118›Full record

Observational studyJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2023

European Health Data & Evidence Network-learnings from building out a standardized international health data network.

Erica A Voss, Clair Blacketer, Sebastiaan van Sandijk, Maxim Moinat, Michael Kallfelz, Michel van Speybroeck, Daniel Prieto-Alhambra, Martijn J Schuemie, Peter R Rijnbeek

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Federated learning's uncomfortable truth: why human networks matter more than neural networks.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Assessing Real-World Data From Electronic Health Records for Health Technology Assessment: The SUITABILITY Checklist: A Good Practices Report of an ISPOR Task Force.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Erica A VossOHDSI Collaborators, Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI), New York, NY, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0651-0613
Clair BlacketerOHDSI Collaborators, Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI), New York, NY, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-2570-2124
Sebastiaan van SandijkOHDSI Collaborators, Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI), New York, NY, United States.
Maxim MoinatOHDSI Collaborators, Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI), New York, NY, United States.
Michael KallfelzOHDSI Collaborators, Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI), New York, NY, United States.
Michel van SpeybroeckJanssen Pharmaceutical Research and Development LLC, Raritan, NJ 08869, United States.
Daniel Prieto-AlhambraOHDSI Collaborators, Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI), New York, NY, United States.
Martijn J SchuemieOHDSI Collaborators, Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI), New York, NY, United States.
Peter R RijnbeekOHDSI Collaborators, Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI), New York, NY, United States.
Erasmus MC · NLJanssen (United States) · USOffice for National Statistics · GBUniversity of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveHealth data standardized to a common data model (CDM) simplifies and facilitates research. This study examines the factors that make standardizing observational health data to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) CDM successful. MATERIALS AND

methodsTwenty-five data partners (DPs) from 11 countries received funding from the European Health Data Evidence Network (EHDEN) to standardize their data. Three surveys, DataQualityDashboard results, and statistics from the conversion process were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively. Our measures of success were the total number of days to transform source data into the OMOP CDM and participation in network research.

resultsThe health data converted to CDM represented more than 133 million patients. 100%, 88%, and 84% of DPs took Surveys 1, 2, and 3. The median duration of the 6 key extract, transform, and load (ETL) processes ranged from 4 to 115 days. Of the 25 DPs, 21 DPs were considered applicable for analysis of which 52% standardized their data on time, and 48% participated in an international collaborative study. DISCUSSION: This study shows that the consistent workflow used by EHDEN proves appropriate to support the successful standardization of observational data across Europe. Over the 25 successful transformations, we confirmed that getting the right people for the ETL is critical and vocabulary mapping requires specific expertise and support of tools. Additionally, we learned that teams that proactively prepared for data governance issues were able to avoid considerable delays improving their ability to finish on time.

conclusionThis study provides guidance for future DPs to standardize to the OMOP CDM and participate in distributed networks. We demonstrate that the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics community must continue to evaluate and provide guidance and support for what ultimately develops the backbone of how community members generate evidence.

Indexed as

Global HealthMedicineDatabases, FactualElectronic Health RecordsEuropeHumansdata standardizationobservational dataOMOP common data model

Identifiers

PMID37952118
PMCPMC10746315
OpenAlexW4388605950

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.