ArticleJAMIA open2025
Using the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model for a multi-registry intensive care unit benchmarking federated analysis: lessons learned.
Article in JAMIA open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the SMS-ICU score for multicontinental use: A federated external validation study using critical care registry data.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2026Article
- Data Resource Profile Update: The Dutch National Intensive Care Evaluation (NICE) registry.International journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Treatment Response Phenotyping Informed by Patient Physiologic Characteristics Could Drive Precision Critical Care Through Augmented Intelligence: A Narrative Review.CHEST critical care · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Federated analysis is a method that allows data analysis to be performed on similar datasets without exchanging any data, thus facilitating international research collaboration while adhering to strict privacy laws. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of using federated analysis to benchmark mortality in 2 critical care quality registry databases converted to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM), describing challenges to and recommendations for performing federated analysis on data transformed to OMOP CDM. Materials and Methods: To identify as many challenges as possible and to be able to complete the benchmarking phase, a 2-step approach was taken during implementation. The first step was a naive implementation to allow challenges to surface naturally; the second step was developing solutions for the encountered challenges. Expected patient mortality risk was calculated by applying the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) model to data from OMOP CDM databases containing adult ICU encounters between July 1, 2019 and December 31, 2022. An analysis script was developed to calculate comparable, registry level standardized mortality ratios. Challenges were recorded and categorized into predefined categories: "data preparation," "data analysis plan," and "data interpretation." Challenges specific to the OMOP CDM were further categorized using published steps from an existing generic harmonization process. Results: A total of 7 challenges were identified, 4 of which were related to data preparation, 1 to data analysis, and 1 to data interpretation. Out of all 7 challenges, 4 stemmed from decisions made during the implementation of OMOP CDM. Several recommended solutions were distilled from the naive approach. Discussion: Federated analysis facilitated by a CDM is a feasible option for critical care quality registries. However, future analysis is influenced by decisions made during the CDM implementation process. Thus, prior publication of data dictionaries and the use of metadata to communicate data handling and data source classification during CDM implementation will improve the efficiency and accuracy of subsequent analysis.
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.