+ Site Statistics
References:
54,258,434
Abstracts:
29,560,870
PMIDs:
28,072,757
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Preparing Electronic Clinical Data for Quality Improvement and Comparative Effectiveness Research: The SCOAP CERTAIN Automation and Validation Project



Preparing Electronic Clinical Data for Quality Improvement and Comparative Effectiveness Research: The SCOAP CERTAIN Automation and Validation Project



Egems 1(1): 1025



The field of clinical research informatics includes creation of clinical data repositories (CDRs) used to conduct quality improvement (QI) activities and comparative effectiveness research (CER). Ideally, CDR data are accurately and directly abstracted from disparate electronic health records (EHRs), across diverse health-systems. Investigators from Washington State's Surgical Care Outcomes and Assessment Program (SCOAP) Comparative Effectiveness Research Translation Network (CERTAIN) are creating such a CDR. This manuscript describes the automation and validation methods used to create this digital infrastructure. SCOAP is a QI benchmarking initiative. Data are manually abstracted from EHRs and entered into a data management system. CERTAIN investigators are now deploying Caradigm's Amalga™ tool to facilitate automated abstraction of data from multiple, disparate EHRs. Concordance is calculated to compare data automatically to manually abstracted. Performance measures are calculated between Amalga and each parent EHR. Validation takes place in repeated loops, with improvements made over time. When automated abstraction reaches the current benchmark for abstraction accuracy - 95% - itwill 'go-live' at each site. A technical analysis was completed at 14 sites. Five sites are contributing; the remaining sites prioritized meeting Meaningful Use criteria. Participating sites are contributing 15-18 unique data feeds, totaling 13 surgical registry use cases. Common feeds are registration, laboratory, transcription/dictation, radiology, and medications. Approximately 50% of 1,320 designated data elements are being automatically abstracted-25% from structured data; 25% from text mining. In semi-automating data abstraction and conducting a rigorous validation, CERTAIN investigators will semi-automate data collection to conduct QI and CER, while advancing the Learning Healthcare System.

(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 058609387

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 25848565


Related references

Automating Electronic Clinical Data Capture for Quality Improvement and Research: The CERTAIN Validation Project of Real World Evidence. Egems 6(1): 8, 2018

Lessons from the Electronic Data Methods Forum: collaboration at the frontier of comparative effectiveness research, patient-centered outcomes research, and quality improvement. Medical Care 51(8 Suppl 3): S1-S3, 2013

Electronic Data Methods (EDM) forum building the infrastructure to conduct comparative effectiveness research and patient-centered outcomes research using electronic clinical data. Medical Care 50 Suppl: Ii, 2012

Availability of structured and unstructured clinical data for comparative effectiveness research and quality improvement: a multisite assessment. Egems 2(1): 1079, 2014

Using primary care electronic health record data for comparative effectiveness research: experience of data quality assessment and preprocessing in The Netherlands. Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research 5(4): 345-354, 2018

Diabetes and asthma case identification, validation, and representativeness when using electronic health data to construct registries for comparative effectiveness and epidemiologic research. Medical Care 50 Suppl: S30-S35, 2012

Quality Improvement Project: Integration of Real-Time Clinical Data Collection and Validation to Standardize Initial Therapy for aGVHD. Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation 22(3): S282-S283, 2016

Ethics and informed consent for comparative effectiveness research with prospective electronic clinical data. Medical Care 51(8 Suppl 3): S53-S57, 2013

Opportunities and challenges for comparative effectiveness research (CER) with Electronic Clinical Data: a perspective from the EDM forum. Medical Care 50 Suppl: S11-S18, 2012

Secondary EMR data for quality improvement and research: A comparison of manual and electronic data collection from an integrated critical care electronic medical record system. Journal of Critical Care 47: 295-301, 2018

A tall order on a tight timeframe: stakeholder perspectives on comparative effectiveness research using electronic clinical data. Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research 1(5): 441-451, 2014

CER Hub: An informatics platform for conducting comparative effectiveness research using multi-institutional, heterogeneous, electronic clinical data. International Journal of Medical Informatics 84(10): 763-773, 2016

PS2-40: Using Automation to Add Electronic Clinical Data to a Research Patient Registry. Clinical Medicine & Research 11(3): 155-156, 2013

Expressing observations from electronic medical record flowsheets in an i2b2 based clinical data repository to support research and quality improvement. AMIA ... Annual Symposium Proceedings. AMIA Symposium 2011: 1454-1463, 2013

Electronic data collection tools for quality improvement: antibiotic utilization project. AMIA ... Annual Symposium Proceedings. AMIA Symposium 2004: 788, 2004