ArticleFrontiers in big data2026
Evaluating the impact of OMOP-CDM on data quality insight generation in respiratory disease management.
Article in Frontiers in big data, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The increasing volume and heterogeneity of patient care data present significant challenges for comprehensive analysis and the generation of insights, particularly in specific areas such as respiratory diseases. Standardizing diverse health data is crucial for enabling large-scale observational research and ensuring data readiness. The Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM) provides a widely adopted standard for harmonizing such data. However, evaluating the quality of data transformed into the OMOP CDM format is a critical step before its use in research or clinical decision support. This study evaluates the impact of the OMOP CDM standardization process on generating data quality insights for a respiratory disease dataset. The source dataset was initially paper-based, converted to an electronic format, and translated from French into English. This historical dataset covers the years 2009-2023 and contains 108 variables and 2,154 records. The data underwent the standard Extract, Transform, and Load (ETL) process to convert into the OMOP CDM format. Following this transformation, the quality of the resulting OMOP CDM instance was assessed. We utilized the Data Quality Dashboard (DQD) to evaluate the quality of the OMOP CDM database before and after ETL verification. DQD performs validation checks on the data based on key data quality dimensions, including completeness, plausibility, and conformance. Overall, the assessment conducted 2,344 checks, of which 2,269 passed, and 75 failed, resulting in a corrected pass rate of 96% for the Respiratory Diseases Inpatients data before ETL verification. After ETL verification, the assessment conducted 2,374 checks, of which 2,356 passed, and 40 failed, resulting in a 100% corrected pass rate. Standardizing respiratory disease data using the OMOP CDM enabled a structured and transparent evaluation of data quality. Through the application of the DQD, this study demonstrated the utility of OMOP CDM in generating meaningful data quality insights. These findings highlight the model's potential to enhance data readiness and support evidence-based decision-making in respiratory disease management.
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.