Subscribe to RSS
Transformation of Electronic Health Records and Questionnaire Data to OMOP CDM: A Feasibility Study Using SG_T2DM DatasetFunding This research is funded by the National Medical Research Council (NMRC) under the Open Fund - Large Collaborative Grant (OF-LCG) - NMRC/OFLCG/001/2017 and Centre Grant (CG) schemes - NMRC/CG/C016/2017.
Background Diabetes mellitus (DM) is an important public health concern in Singapore and places a massive burden on health care spending. Tackling chronic diseases such as DM requires innovative strategies to integrate patients' data from diverse sources and use scientific discovery to inform clinical practice that can help better manage the disease. The Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM) was chosen as the framework for integrating data with disparate formats.
Objective The study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of converting Singapore based data source, comprising of electronic health records (EHR), cognitive and depression assessment questionnaire data to OMOP CDM standard. Additionally, we also validate whether our OMOP CDM instance is fit for the purpose of research by executing a simple treatment pathways study using Atlas, a graphical user interface tool to conduct analysis on OMOP CDM data as a proof of concept.
Methods We used de-identified EHR, cognitive, and depression assessment questionnaires data from a tertiary care hospital in Singapore to convert it to version 5.3.1 of OMOP CDM standard. We evaluate the OMOP CDM conversion by (1) assessing the mapping coverage (that is the percentage of source terms mapped to OMOP CDM standard); (2) local raw dataset versus CDM dataset analysis; and (3) Implementing Harmonized Intrinsic Data Quality Framework using an open-source R package called Data Quality Dashboard.
Results The content coverage of OMOP CDM vocabularies is more than 90% for clinical data, but only around 11% for questionnaire data. The comparison of characteristics between source and target data returned consistent results and our transformed data did not pass 38 (1.4%) out of 2,622 quality checks.
Conclusion Adoption of OMOP CDM at our site demonstrated that EHR data are feasible for standardization with minimal information loss, whereas challenges remain for standardizing cognitive and depression assessment questionnaire data that requires further work.
KeywordsOMOP CDM - implementation - deployment - electronic health record - diabetes - secondary use of EHR data - cognitive and depression questionnaires - survey data
Protection of Human and Animal Subjects
We used de-identified patient data for this study and is approved by the Institutional Review Board (Study Reference Number: 2017/00662).
E.S.T. and S.C.L. are co-investigator on grants from the NMRC under the OF-LCG and CG schemes. The grants are awarded to the institution which employ them. S.M.K.S. current research team member was hired under this grant. J.Y.S. former research team member was hired under this grant. S.Y.M. current research team member is working in the institution which received the grant from the NMRC under the OF-LCG and CG schemes.
Received: 20 January 2021
Accepted: 07 June 2021
Article published online:
11 August 2021
© 2021. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
- 1 Al-Lawati JA. Diabetes mellitus: a local and global public health emergency!. Oman Med J 2017; 32 (03) 177-179
- 2 Diabetes. Who.int. Accessed April 6, 2021 at: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/diabetes#:~:text=WHO%20estimates%20that%20diabetes%20was,onset%20of%20type%202%20diabetes
- 3 MOH | News Highlights. Moh.gov.sg. Accessed April 6, 2021 at: https://www.moh.gov.sg/news-highlights/details/diabetes-the-war-continues
- 4 Luo M, Tan LWL, Sim X. et al. Cohort profile: the Singapore diabetic cohort study. BMJ Open 2020; 10 (05) e036443
- 5 Munshi MN. Cognitive dysfunction in older adults with diabetes: what a clinician needs to know. Diabetes Care 2017; 40 (04) 461-467
- 6 Garza M, Del Fiol G, Tenenbaum J, Walden A, Zozus MN. Evaluating common data models for use with a longitudinal community registry. J Biomed Inform 2016; 64: 333-341
- 7 Data Standardization – OHDSI. Ohdsi.org. Accessed April 6, 2021 at: https://ohdsi.org/data-standardization/
- 8 Haberson A, Rinner C, Schöberl A, Gall W. Feasibility of mapping austrian health claims data to the OMOP common data model. J Med Syst 2019; 43 (10) 314
- 9 Maier C, Lang L, Storf H. et al. Towards implementation of OMOP in a German University Hospital Consortium. Appl Clin Inform 2018; 9 (01) 54-61
- 10 Makadia R, Ryan PB. Transforming the premier perspective hospital database into the observational medical outcomes partnership (OMOP) common data model. EGEMS (Wash DC) 2014; 2 (01) 1110
- 11 Lamer A, Depas N, Doutreligne M. et al. Transforming French Electronic Health Records into the observational medical outcome partnership's common data model: a feasibility study. Appl Clin Inform 2020; 11 (01) 13-22
- 12 Zhou X, Murugesan S, Bhullar H. et al. An evaluation of the THIN database in the OMOP Common Data Model for active drug safety surveillance. Drug Saf 2013; 36 (02) 119-134
- 13 Cho S, Sin M, Tsapepas D. et al. Content coverage evaluation of the OMOP vocabulary on the transplant domain focusing on concepts relevant for kidney transplant outcomes analysis. Appl Clin Inform 2020; 11 (04) 650-658
- 14 Patrick Ryan, Martijn Schuemie, Vojtech Huser, Chris Knoll, Ajit Londhe and Taha Abdul-Basser (2019). Achilles: Creates Descriptive Statistics Summary for an Entire OMOP CDM Instance. R package version. Accessed 2019 at: https://ohdsi.github.io/Achilles/1.6.7
- 15 OHDSI/DataQualityDashboard. GitHub. Published 2021. Accessed April 6, 2021 at: https://github.com/OHDSI/DataQualityDashboard
- 16 Kahn MG, Callahan TJ, Barnard J. et al. A harmonized data quality assessment terminology and framework for the secondary use of electronic health record data. EGEMS (Wash DC) 2016; 4 (01) 1244
- 17 OHDSI/CommonDataModel. GitHub. Published 2021. Accessed April 6, 2021 at: https://github.com/OHDSI/CommonDataModel/
- 18 Glyburide DrugBank Online. Go.drugbank.com. Published 2021. Accessed April 6, 2021 at: https://go.drugbank.com/drugs/DB01016
- 19 Recommendations to avoid use of glibenclamide in the elderly and renal-impaired. HSA. Published 2021. Accessed April 6, 2021 at: https://www.hsa.gov.sg/announcements/safety-alert/recommendations-to-avoid-use-of-glibenclamide-in-the-elderly-and-renal-impaired
- 20 Athena. Athena.ohdsi.org. Published 2021. Accessed April 6, 2021 at: https://athena.ohdsi.org/search-terms/start
- 21 OHDSI/Usagi. GitHub. Published 2021. Accessed April 6, 2021 at: https://github.com/OHDSI/Usagi
- 22 ATLAS. Atlas.ohdsi.org. Published 2021. Accessed April 6, 2021 at: https://atlas.ohdsi.org/
- 23 Hripcsak G, Ryan PB, Duke JD. et al. Characterizing treatment pathways at scale using the OHDSI network. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2016; 113 (27) 7329-7336
- 24 OHDSI/DataQualityDashboard. GitHub. Accessed April 6, 2021 at: https://github.com/OHDSI/DataQualityDashboard/tree/master/inst/csv
- 25 Observational Health Data Sciences. Informatics. The book of OHDSI. Github.io. Accessed April 6, 2021 at: https://ohdsi.github.io/TheBookOfOhdsi/
- 26 AACE/ACE Clinical Practice Guidelines for Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan - © 2015. Accessed April 6, 2021 at: pro.aace.com. https://pro.aace.com/disease-state-resources/diabetes/clinical-practice-guidelines/aaceace-clinical-practice-guidelines
- 27 Huser V. Data quality assessment of laboratory data. Accessed 2021 at: https://knowledge.amia.org/72332-amia-1.4602255/t005-1.4604904/t005-1.4604905/3413748-1.4605506/3413748-1.4605507?qr=1
- 28 Jonnagaddala J. External validation of type II diabetes electronic phenotyping algorithms. Accessed 2021 at: Presented at the: https://www.ohdsi.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/OHDI_symposium_2020_T2DM_poster_JJ.pdf
- 29 Report S. Data protection in the internet. In: Data Protection in the Internet. Springer; Cham: 2019. https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783030280482 . Accessed January 18, 2021
- 30 Rodrigues JJ, de la Torre I, Fernández G, López-Coronado M. Analysis of the security and privacy requirements of cloud-based electronic health records systems. J Med Internet Res 2013; 15 (08) e186
- 31 Salloway MK, Deng X, Ning Y. et al. A de-identification tool for users in medical operations and public health. 2016 IEEE-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical and Health Informatics (BHI). Accessed 2021 at: DOI: 10.1109/bhi.2016.7455951
- 32 Hripcsak G, Mirhaji P, Low AF, Malin BA. Preserving temporal relations in clinical data while maintaining privacy. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2016; 23 (06) 1040-1045
- 33 Johnson AE, Pollard TJ, Shen L. et al. MIMIC-III, a freely accessible critical care database. Sci Data 2016; 3 (01) 160035