Search

Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC), also known as Long-COVID, encompasses a variety of complex and varied outcomes following COVID-19 infection that are still poorly understood. We clustered over 600 million condition diagnoses from 14 million patients available through the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C), generating hundreds of highly detailed clinical phenotypes. Assessing patient clinical trajectories using these clusters allowed us to identify individual conditions and phenotypes strongly increased after acute infection. We found many conditions increased in COVID-19 patients compared to controls, and using a novel method to associate patients with clusters over time, we additionally found phenotypes specific to patient sex, age, wave of infection, and PASC diagnosis status. While many of these results reflect known PASC symptoms, the resolution provided by this unprecedented data scale suggests avenues for improved diagnostics and mechanistic understanding of this multifaceted disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: More than one-third of individuals experience post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC, which includes long-COVID). The objective is to identify risk factors associated with PASC/long-COVID diagnosis. Methods: This was a retrospective case–control study including 31 health systems in the United States from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C). 8,325 individuals with PASC (defined by the presence of the International Classification of Diseases, version 10 code U09.9 or a long-COVID clinic visit) matched to 41,625 controls within the same health system and COVID index date within ± 45 days of the corresponding case's earliest COVID index date. Measurements of risk factors included demographics, comorbidities, treatment and acute characteristics related to COVID-19. Multivariable logistic regression, random forest, and XGBoost were used to determine the associations between risk factors and PASC. Results: Among 8,325 individuals with PASC, the majority were > 50 years of age (56.6%), female (62.8%), and non-Hispanic White (68.6%). In logistic regression, middle-age categories (40 to 69 years; OR ranging from 2.32 to 2.58), female sex (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.33–1.48), hospitalization associated with COVID-19 (OR 3.8, 95% CI 3.05–4.73), long (8–30 days, OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.31–2.17) or extended hospital stay (30 + days, OR 3.38, 95% CI 2.45–4.67), receipt of mechanical ventilation (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.18–1.74), and several comorbidities including depression (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.40–1.60), chronic lung disease (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.53–1.74), and obesity (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.16–1.3) were associated with increased likelihood of PASC diagnosis or care at a long-COVID clinic. Characteristics associated with a lower likelihood of PASC diagnosis or care at a long-COVID clinic included younger age (18 to 29 years), male sex, non-Hispanic Black race, and comorbidities such as substance abuse, cardiomyopathy, psychosis, and dementia. More doctors per capita in the county of residence was associated with an increased likelihood of PASC diagnosis or care at a long-COVID clinic. Our findings were consistent in sensitivity analyses using a variety of analytic techniques and approaches to select controls. Conclusions: This national study identified important risk factors for PASC diagnosis such as middle age, severe COVID-19 disease, and specific comorbidities. Further clinical and epidemiological research is needed to better understand underlying mechanisms and the potential role of vaccines and therapeutics in altering PASC course. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Identifying individuals with a higher risk of developing severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes will inform targeted and more intensive clinical monitoring and management. To date, there is mixed evidence regarding the impact of preexisting autoimmune disease (AID) diagnosis and/or immunosuppressant (IS) exposure on developing severe COVID-19 outcomes. Methods A retrospective cohort of adults diagnosed with COVID-19 was created in the National COVID Cohort Collaborative enclave. Two outcomes, life-threatening disease and hospitalization, were evaluated by using logistic regression models with and without adjustment for demographics and comorbidities. Results Of the 2 453 799 adults diagnosed with COVID-19, 191 520 (7.81%) had a preexisting AID diagnosis and 278 095 (11.33%) had a preexisting IS exposure. Logistic regression models adjusted for demographics and comorbidities demonstrated that individuals with a preexisting AID (odds ratio [OR], 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09–1.17; P <.001), IS exposure (OR, 1.27; 95% CI: 1.24–1.30; P <.001), or both (OR, 1.35; 95% CI: 1.29–1.40; P <.001) were more likely to have a life-threatening disease. These results were consistent when hospitalization was evaluated. A sensitivity analysis evaluating specific IS revealed that tumor necrosis factor inhibitors were protective against life-threatening disease (OR, 0.80; 95% CI:.66–.96; P =.017) and hospitalization (OR, 0.80; 95% CI:.73–.89; P <.001). Conclusions Patients with preexisting AID, IS exposure, or both are more likely to have a life-threatening disease or hospitalization. These patients may thus require tailored monitoring and preventative measures to minimize negative consequences of COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Machine learning (ML)-driven computable phenotypes are among the most challenging to share and reproduce. Despite this difficulty, the urgent public health considerations around Long COVID make it especially important to ensure the rigor and reproducibility of Long COVID phenotyping algorithms such that they can be made available to a broad audience of researchers. As part of the NIH Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery (RECOVER) Initiative, researchers with the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) devised and trained an ML-based phenotype to identify patients highly probable to have Long COVID. Supported by RECOVER, N3C and NIH's All of Us study partnered to reproduce the output of N3C's trained model in the All of Us data enclave, demonstrating model extensibility in multiple environments. This case study in ML-based phenotype reuse illustrates how open-source software best practices and cross-site collaboration can de-black-box phenotyping algorithms, prevent unnecessary rework, and promote open science in informatics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Clinical encounter data are heterogeneous and vary greatly from institution to institution. These problems of variance affect interpretability and usability of clinical encounter data for analysis. These problems are magnified when multisite electronic health record (EHR) data are networked together. This article presents a novel, generalizable method for resolving encounter heterogeneity for analysis by combining related atomic encounters into composite "macrovisits." Materials and Methods Encounters were composed of data from 75 partner sites harmonized to a common data model as part of the NIH Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery Initiative, a project of the National Covid Cohort Collaborative. Summary statistics were computed for overall and site-level data to assess issues and identify modifications. Two algorithms were developed to refine atomic encounters into cleaner, analyzable longitudinal clinical visits. Results Atomic inpatient encounters data were found to be widely disparate between sites in terms of length-of-stay (LOS) and numbers of OMOP CDM measurements per encounter. After aggregating encounters to macrovisits, LOS and measurement variance decreased. A subsequent algorithm to identify hospitalized macrovisits further reduced data variability. Discussion Encounters are a complex and heterogeneous component of EHR data and native data issues are not addressed by existing methods. These types of complex and poorly studied issues contribute to the difficulty of deriving value from EHR data, and these types of foundational, large-scale explorations, and developments are necessary to realize the full potential of modern real-world data. Conclusion This article presents method developments to manipulate and resolve EHR encounter data issues in a generalizable way as a foundation for future research and analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Long COVID, or complications arising from COVID-19 weeks after infection, has become a central concern for public health experts. The United States National Institutes of Health founded the RECOVER initiative to better understand long COVID. We used electronic health records available through the National COVID Cohort Collaborative to characterize the association between SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and long COVID diagnosis. Among patients with a COVID-19 infection between August 1, 2021 and January 31, 2022, we defined two cohorts using distinct definitions of long COVID—a clinical diagnosis (n = 47,404) or a previously described computational phenotype (n = 198,514)—to compare unvaccinated individuals to those with a complete vaccine series prior to infection. Evidence of long COVID was monitored through June or July of 2022, depending on patients' data availability. We found that vaccination was consistently associated with lower odds and rates of long COVID clinical diagnosis and high-confidence computationally derived diagnosis after adjusting for sex, demographics, and medical history. The extent to which COVID-19 vaccination protects against long COVID is not well understood. Here, the authors use electronic health record data from the United States and find that, for people who received their vaccination prior to infection, vaccination was associated with lower incidence of long COVID. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background : Naming a newly discovered disease is a difficult process; in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and the existence of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC), which includes long COVID, it has proven especially challenging. Disease definitions and assignment of a diagnosis code are often asynchronous and iterative. The clinical definition and our understanding of the underlying mechanisms of long COVID are still in flux, and the deployment of an ICD-10-CM code for long COVID in the USA took nearly 2 years after patients had begun to describe their condition. Here, we leverage the largest publicly available HIPAA-limited dataset about patients with COVID-19 in the US to examine the heterogeneity of adoption and use of U09.9, the ICD-10-CM code for "Post COVID-19 condition, unspecified." Methods: We undertook a number of analyses to characterize the N3C population with a U09.9 diagnosis code (n = 33,782), including assessing person-level demographics and a number of area-level social determinants of health; diagnoses commonly co-occurring with U09.9, clustered using the Louvain algorithm; and quantifying medications and procedures recorded within 60 days of U09.9 diagnosis. We stratified all analyses by age group in order to discern differing patterns of care across the lifespan. Results: We established the diagnoses most commonly co-occurring with U09.9 and algorithmically clustered them into four major categories: cardiopulmonary, neurological, gastrointestinal, and comorbid conditions. Importantly, we discovered that the population of patients diagnosed with U09.9 is demographically skewed toward female, White, non-Hispanic individuals, as well as individuals living in areas with low poverty and low unemployment. Our results also include a characterization of common procedures and medications associated with U09.9-coded patients. Conclusions: This work offers insight into potential subtypes and current practice patterns around long COVID and speaks to the existence of disparities in the diagnosis of patients with long COVID. This latter finding in particular requires further research and urgent remediation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The goals of this study were to harmonize data from electronic health records (EHRs) into common units, and impute units that were missing. Materials and Methods The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) table of laboratory measurement data—over 3.1 billion patient records and over 19 000 unique measurement concepts in the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) common-data-model format from 55 data partners. We grouped ontologically similar OMOP concepts together for 52 variables relevant to COVID-19 research, and developed a unit-harmonization pipeline comprised of (1) selecting a canonical unit for each measurement variable, (2) arriving at a formula for conversion, (3) obtaining clinical review of each formula, (4) applying the formula to convert data values in each unit into the target canonical unit, and (5) removing any harmonized value that fell outside of accepted value ranges for the variable. For data with missing units for all the results within a lab test for a data partner, we compared values with pooled values of all data partners, using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Results Of the concepts without missing values, we harmonized 88.1% of the values, and imputed units for 78.2% of records where units were absent (41% of contributors' records lacked units). Discussion The harmonization and inference methods developed herein can serve as a resource for initiatives aiming to extract insight from heterogeneous EHR collections. Unique properties of centralized data are harnessed to enable unit inference. Conclusion The pipeline we developed for the pooled N3C data enables use of measurements that would otherwise be unavailable for analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used to reduce pain, fever, and inflammation but have been associated with complications in community-acquired pneumonia. Observations shortly after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 suggested that ibuprofen was associated with an increased risk of adverse events in COVID-19 patients, but subsequent observational studies failed to demonstrate increased risk and in one case showed reduced risk associated with NSAID use. Methods: A 38-center retrospective cohort study was performed that leveraged the harmonized, high-granularity electronic health record data of the National COVID Cohort Collaborative. A propensity-matched cohort of 19,746 COVID-19 inpatients was constructed by matching cases (treated with NSAIDs at the time of admission) and 19,746 controls (not treated) from 857,061 patients with COVID-19 available for analysis. The primary outcome of interest was COVID-19 severity in hospitalized patients, which was classified as: moderate, severe, or mortality/hospice. Secondary outcomes were acute kidney injury (AKI), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), invasive ventilation, and all-cause mortality at any time following COVID-19 diagnosis. Results: Logistic regression showed that NSAID use was not associated with increased COVID-19 severity (OR: 0.57 95% CI: 0.53–0.61). Analysis of secondary outcomes using logistic regression showed that NSAID use was not associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality (OR 0.51 95% CI: 0.47–0.56), invasive ventilation (OR: 0.59 95% CI: 0.55–0.64), AKI (OR: 0.67 95% CI: 0.63–0.72), or ECMO (OR: 0.51 95% CI: 0.36–0.7). In contrast, the odds ratios indicate reduced risk of these outcomes, but our quantitative bias analysis showed E-values of between 1.9 and 3.3 for these associations, indicating that comparatively weak or moderate confounder associations could explain away the observed associations. Conclusions: Study interpretation is limited by the observational design. Recording of NSAID use may have been incomplete. Our study demonstrates that NSAID use is not associated with increased COVID-19 severity, all-cause mortality, invasive ventilation, AKI, or ECMO in COVID-19 inpatients. A conservative interpretation in light of the quantitative bias analysis is that there is no evidence that NSAID use is associated with risk of increased severity or the other measured outcomes. Our results confirm and extend analogous findings in previous observational studies using a large cohort of patients drawn from 38 centers in a nationally representative multicenter database. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Integrated Clinical and Environmental Exposures Service (ICEES) serves as an open-source, disease-agnostic, regulatory-compliant framework and approach for openly exposing and exploring clinical data that have been integrated at the patient level with a variety of environmental exposures data. ICEES is equipped with tools to support basic statistical exploration of the integrated data in a completely open manner. Objective: This study aims to further develop and apply ICEES as a novel tool for openly exposing and exploring integrated clinical and environmental data. We focus on an asthma use case. Methods: We queried the ICEES open application programming interface (OpenAPI) using a functionality that supports chi-square tests between feature variables and a primary outcome measure, with a Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons (α=.001). We focused on 2 primary outcomes that are indicative of asthma exacerbations: annual emergency department (ED) or inpatient visits for respiratory issues; and annual prescriptions for prednisone. Results: Of the 157,410 patients within the asthma cohort, 26,332 (16.73%) had 1 or more annual ED or inpatient visits for respiratory issues, and 17,056 (10.84%) had 1 or more annual prescriptions for prednisone. We found that close proximity to a major roadway or highway, exposure to high levels of particulate matter ≤2.5 μm (PM2.5) or ozone, female sex, Caucasian race, low residential density, lack of health insurance, and low household income were significantly associated with asthma exacerbations (P<.001). Asthma exacerbations did not vary by rural versus urban residence. Moreover, the results were largely consistent across outcome measures. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that the open-source ICEES can be used to replicate and extend published findings on factors that influence asthma exacerbations. As a disease-agnostic, open-source approach for integrating, exposing, and exploring patient-level clinical and environmental exposures data, we believe that ICEES will have broad adoption by other institutions and application in environmental health and other biomedical fields. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Institutions must decide how to manage the use of clinical data to support research while ensuring appropriate protections are in place. Questions about data use and sharing often go beyond what the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) considers. In this article, we describe our institution's governance model and approach. Common questions we consider include (1) Is a request limited to the minimum data necessary to carry the research forward? (2) What plans are there for sharing data externally?, and (3) What impact will the proposed use of data have on patients and the institution? In 2020, 302 of the 319 requests reviewed were approved. The majority of requests were approved in less than 2 weeks, with few or no stipulations. For the remaining requests, the governance committee works with researchers to find solutions to meet their needs while also addressing our collective goal of protecting patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In response to COVID-19, the informatics community united to aggregate as much clinical data as possible to characterize this new disease and reduce its impact through collaborative analytics. The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) is now the largest publicly available HIPAA limited dataset in US history with over 6.4 million patients and is a testament to a partnership of over 100 organizations.Materials and Methods: We developed a pipeline for ingesting, harmonizing, and centralizing data from 56 contributing data partners using 4 federated Common Data Models. N3C data quality (DQ) review involves both automated and manual procedures. In the process, several DQ heuristics were discovered in our centralized context, both within the pipeline and during downstream project-based analysis. Feedback to the sites led to many local and centralized DQ improvements.Results: Beyond well-recognized DQ findings, we discovered 15 heuristics relating to source Common Data Model conformance, demographics, COVID tests, conditions, encounters, measurements, observations, coding completeness, and fitness for use. Of 56 sites, 37 sites (66%) demonstrated issues through these heuristics. These 37 sites demonstrated improvement after receiving feedback.Discussion: We encountered site-to-site differences in DQ which would have been challenging to discover using federated checks alone. We have demonstrated that centralized DQ benchmarking reveals unique opportunities for DQ improvement that will support improved research analytics locally and in aggregate.Conclusion: By combining rapid, continual assessment of DQ with a large volume of multisite data, it is possible to support more nuanced scientific questions with the scale and rigor that they require. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many research studies fail to enroll enough research participants. Patient-facing electronic health record applications, known as patient portals, may be used to send research invitations to eligible patients. Objective: The first aim was to determine if receipt of a patient portal research recruitment invitation was associated with enrollment in a large ongoing study of newborns (Early Check). The second aim was to determine if there were differences in opening the patient portal research recruitment invitation and study enrollment by race and ethnicity, age, or rural/urban home address. Methods: We used a computable phenotype and queried the health care system's clinical data warehouse to identify women whose newborns would likely be eligible. Research recruitment invitations were sent through the women's patient portals. We conducted logistic regressions to test whether women enrolled their newborns after receipt of a patient portal invitation and whether there were differences by race and ethnicity, age, and rural/urban home address. Results: Research recruitment invitations were sent to 4510 women not yet enrolled through their patient portals between November 22, 2019, through March 5, 2020. Among women who received a patient portal invitation, 3.6% (161/4510) enrolled their newborns within 27 days. The odds of enrolling among women who opened the invitation was nearly 9 times the odds of enrolling among women who did not open their invitation (SE 3.24, OR 8.86, 95% CI 4.33-18.13; P<.001). On average, it took 3.92 days for women to enroll their newborn in the study, with 64% (97/161) enrolling their newborn within 1 day of opening the invitation. There were disparities by race and urbanicity in enrollment in the study after receipt of a patient portal research invitation but not by age. Black women were less likely to enroll their newborns than White women (SE 0.09, OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.16-0.55; P<.001), and women in urban zip codes were more likely to enroll their newborns than women in rural zip codes (SE 0.97, OR 3.03, 95% CI 1.62-5.67; P=.001). Black women (SE 0.05, OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.57-0.78; P<.001) and Hispanic women (SE 0.07, OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.60-0.89; P=.002) were less likely to open the research invitation compared to White women. Conclusions: Patient portals are an effective way to recruit participants for research studies, but there are substantial racial and ethnic disparities and disparities by urban/rural status in the use of patient portals, the opening of a patient portal invitation, and enrollment in the study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The recipients of NIH's Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) have worked for over a decade to build informatics infrastructure in support of clinical and translational research. This infrastructure has proved invaluable for supporting responses to the current COVID-19 pandemic through direct patient care, clinical decision support, training researchers and practitioners, as well as public health surveillance and clinical research to levels that could not have been accomplished without the years of ground-laying work by the CTSAs. In this paper, we provide a perspective on our COVID-19 work and present relevant results of a survey of CTSA sites to broaden our understanding of the key features of their informatics programs, the informatics-related challenges they have experienced under COVID-19, and some of the innovations and solutions they developed in response to the pandemic. Responses demonstrated increased reliance by healthcare providers and researchers on access to electronic health record (EHR) data, both for local needs and for sharing with other institutions and national consortia. The initial work of the CTSAs on data capture, standards, interchange, and sharing policies all contributed to solutions, best illustrated by the creation, in record time, of a national clinical data repository in the National COVID-19 Cohort Collaborative (N3C). The survey data support seven recommendations for areas of informatics and public health investment and further study to support clinical and translational research in the post-COVID-19 era. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) poses societal challenges that require expeditious data and knowledge sharing. Though organizational clinical data are abundant, these are largely inaccessible to outside researchers. Statistical, machine learning, and causal analyses are most successful with large-scale data beyond what is available in any given organization. Here, we introduce the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C), an open science community focused on analyzing patient-level data from many centers.Materials and Methods: The Clinical and Translational Science Award Program and scientific community created N3C to overcome technical, regulatory, policy, and governance barriers to sharing and harmonizing individual-level clinical data. We developed solutions to extract, aggregate, and harmonize data across organizations and data models, and created a secure data enclave to enable efficient, transparent, and reproducible collaborative analytics.Results: Organized in inclusive workstreams, we created legal agreements and governance for organizations and researchers; data extraction scripts to identify and ingest positive, negative, and possible COVID-19 cases; a data quality assurance and harmonization pipeline to create a single harmonized dataset; population of the secure data enclave with data, machine learning, and statistical analytics tools; dissemination mechanisms; and a synthetic data pilot to democratize data access.Conclusions: The N3C has demonstrated that a multisite collaborative learning health network can overcome barriers to rapidly build a scalable infrastructure incorporating multiorganizational clinical data for COVID-19 analytics. We expect this effort to save lives by enabling rapid collaboration among clinicians, researchers, and data scientists to identify treatments and specialized care and thereby reduce the immediate and long-term impacts of COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent findings have shown that the continued expansion of the scope and scale of data collected in electronic health records are making the protection of personally identifiable information (PII) more challenging and may inadvertently put our institutions and patients at risk if not addressed. As clinical terminologies expand to include new terms that may capture PII (e.g., Patient First Name, Patient Phone Number), institutions may start using them in clinical data capture (and in some cases, they already have). Once in use, PII-containing values associated with these terms may find their way into laboratory or observation data tables via extract-transform-load jobs intended to process structured data, putting institutions at risk of unintended disclosure. Here we aim to inform the informatics community of these findings, as well as put out a call to action for remediation by the community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE: The Electronic Medical Record Search Engine (EMERSE) is a software tool built to aid research spanning cohort discovery, population health, and data abstraction for clinical trials. EMERSE is now live at three academic medical centers, with additional sites currently working on implementation. In this report, we describe how EMERSE has been used to support cancer research based on a variety of metrics. METHODS: We identified peer-reviewed publications that used EMERSE through online searches as well as through direct e-mails to users based on audit logs. These logs were also used to summarize use at each of the three sites. Search terms for two of the sites were characterized using the natural language processing tool MetaMap to determine to which semantic types the terms could be mapped. RESULTS: We identified a total of 326 peer-reviewed publications that used EMERSE through August 2019, although this is likely an underestimation of the true total based on the use log analysis. Oncology-related research comprised nearly one third (n = 105; 32.2%) of all research output. The use logs showed that EMERSE had been used by multiple people at each site (nearly 3,500 across all three) who had collectively logged into the system > 100,000 times. Many user-entered search queries could not be mapped to a semantic type, but the most common semantic type for terms that did match was "disease or syndrome," followed by "pharmacologic substance." CONCLUSION: EMERSE has been shown to be a valuable tool for supporting cancer research. It has been successfully deployed at other sites, despite some implementation challenges unique to each deployment environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Informatics tools to support the integration and subsequent interrogation of spatiotemporal data such as clinical data and environmental exposures data are lacking. Such tools are needed to support research in environmental health and any biomedical field that is challenged by the need for integrated spatiotemporal data to examine individual-level determinants of health and disease.Results: We have developed an open-source software application-FHIR PIT (Health Level 7 Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources Patient data Integration Tool)-to enable studies on the impact of individual-level environmental exposures on health and disease. FHIR PIT was motivated by the need to integrate patient data derived from our institution's clinical warehouse with a variety of public data sources on environmental exposures and then openly expose the data via ICEES (Integrated Clinical and Environmental Exposures Service). FHIR PIT consists of transformation steps or building blocks that can be chained together to form a transformation and integration workflow. Several transformation steps are generic and thus can be reused. As such, new types of data can be incorporated into the modular FHIR PIT pipeline by simply reusing generic steps or adding new ones. We validated FHIR PIT in the context of a driving use case designed to investigate the impact of airborne pollutant exposures on asthma. Specifically, we replicated published findings demonstrating racial disparities in the impact of airborne pollutants on asthma exacerbations.Conclusions: While FHIR PIT was developed to support our driving use case on asthma, the software can be used to integrate any type and number of spatiotemporal data sources at a level of granularity that enables individual-level study. We expect FHIR PIT to facilitate research in environmental health and numerous other biomedical disciplines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study aimed to develop a novel, regulatory-compliant approach for openly exposing integrated clinical and environmental exposures data: the Integrated Clinical and Environmental Exposures Service (ICEES).Materials and Methods: The driving clinical use case for research and development of ICEES was asthma, which is a common disease influenced by hundreds of genes and a plethora of environmental exposures, including exposures to airborne pollutants. We developed a pipeline for integrating clinical data on patients with asthma-like conditions with data on environmental exposures derived from multiple public data sources. The data were integrated at the patient and visit level and used to create de-identified, binned, "integrated feature tables," which were then placed behind an OpenAPI.Results: Our preliminary evaluation results demonstrate a relationship between exposure to high levels of particulate matter ≤2.5 µm in diameter (PM2.5) and the frequency of emergency department or inpatient visits for respiratory issues. For example, 16.73% of patients with average daily exposure to PM2.5 >9.62 µg/m3 experienced 2 or more emergency department or inpatient visits for respiratory issues in year 2010 compared with 7.93% of patients with lower exposures (n = 23 093).Discussion: The results validated our overall approach for openly exposing and sharing integrated clinical and environmental exposures data. We plan to iteratively refine and expand ICEES by including additional years of data, feature variables, and disease cohorts.Conclusions: We believe that ICEES will serve as a regulatory-compliant model and approach for promoting open access to and sharing of integrated clinical and environmental exposures data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We briefly describe several clinical data types that are commonly employed in clinical and translational research, including fully identified clinical data, HIPAA-limited clinical data, deidentified clinical data, and synthetic data. We highlight several novel approaches for openly exposing clinical data that we have developed as part of the Translator program, namely, HIPAA Safe Harbor Plus (HuSH+) clinical data, clinical profiles, Columbia Open Health Data (COHD), and the Integrated Clinical and Environmental Exposures Service (ICEES). Deidentified clinical data sets may be used for clinical interpretation and scientific inference and discovery but to a lesser extent than HIPAA-limited clinical data sets because of the fact that key variables or covariates may have been removed from the data. Synthetic clinical data sets comprise realistic (but not real) data generated statistically by applying simulation techniques to population distributions of observational patient data. [Extracted from the article]

Objective: Querying electronic health records (EHRs) to find patients meeting study criteria is an efficient method of identifying potential study participants. We aimed to measure the effectiveness of EHR-driven recruitment in the context of ADAPTABLE (Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-Term Effectiveness)-a pragmatic trial aiming to recruit 15 000 patients.Materials and Methods: We compared the participant yield of 4 recruitment methods: in-clinic recruitment by a research coordinator, letters, direct email, and patient portal messages. Taken together, the latter 2 methods comprised our EHR-driven electronic recruitment workflow.Results: The electronic recruitment workflow sent electronic messages to 12 254 recipients; 13.5% of these recipients visited the study website, and 4.2% enrolled in the study. Letters were sent to 427 recipients; 5.6% visited the study website, and 3.3% enrolled in the study. Coordinators recruited 339 participants in clinic; 23.6% visited the study website, and 16.8% enrolled in the study. Five-hundred-nine of the 580 UNC enrollees (87.8%) were recruited using an electronic method.Discussion: Electronic recruitment reached a wide net of patients, recruited many participants to the study, and resulted in a workflow that can be reused for future studies. In-clinic recruitment saw the highest yield, suggesting that a combination of recruitment methods may be the best approach. Future work should account for demographic skew that may result by recruiting from a pool of patient portal users.Conclusion: The success of electronic recruitment for ADAPTABLE makes this workflow well worth incorporating into an overall recruitment strategy, particularly for a pragmatic trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To develop an efficient surveillance approach for childhood diabetes by type across 2 large US health care systems, using phenotyping algorithms derived from electronic health record (EHR) data.Materials and Methods: Presumptive diabetes cases <20 years of age from 2 large independent health care systems were identified as those having ≥1 of the 5 indicators in the past 3.5 years, including elevated HbA1c, elevated blood glucose, diabetes-related billing codes, patient problem list, and outpatient anti-diabetic medications. EHRs of all the presumptive cases were manually reviewed, and true diabetes status and diabetes type were determined. Algorithms for identifying diabetes cases overall and classifying diabetes type were either prespecified or derived from classification and regression tree analysis. Surveillance approach was developed based on the best algorithms identified.Results: We developed a stepwise surveillance approach using billing code-based prespecified algorithms and targeted manual EHR review, which efficiently and accurately ascertained and classified diabetes cases by type, in both health care systems. The sensitivity and positive predictive values in both systems were approximately ≥90% for ascertaining diabetes cases overall and classifying cases with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. About 80% of the cases with "other" type were also correctly classified. This stepwise surveillance approach resulted in a >70% reduction in the number of cases requiring manual validation compared to traditional surveillance methods.Conclusion: EHR data may be used to establish an efficient approach for large-scale surveillance for childhood diabetes by type, although some manual effort is still needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the use of automated algorithms in determining cases of diabetes in children and diabetes type classification based on demographic characteristics. Topics include how administrative and electronic health record data can be used in these algorithms, how age, race, and ethnicity impact the risk of diabetes, and how effective the algorithms were at identifying childhood diabetes of both types.

Type 1 (T1D) and type 2 (T2D) diabetes are distinct diseases, but most federal surveys used to monitor diabetes prevalence have not included questions on diabetes type. To design and validate survey questions that will distinguish between T1D and T2D in adults, we developed a survey sample in whom we first determined a "gold standard" for diabetes type from review of electronic health record (EHR) data. From >50,000 adult patients in the UNC Health Care System with diabetes, we assembled a sample of 2479 patients using a "strawman" definition based on diabetes-related diagnostic codes, laboratory results, and drugs. We stratified the sample using age, sex, race/ethnicity and crude diabetes type, oversampling T1D. For visits between 10/2014 and 9/2017, we collected clinical and demographic data including body mass index, diagnosis codes, medications, family history, and laboratory tests. We also abstracted chart notes, using trained personnel, to find additional information including diabetes duration and historical treatments. We created two models to determine diabetes type. The first was a decision tree, in which higher nodes sorted straightforward cases; lower nodes included more specific factors for those not categorized in higher nodes. The second was a weighted model, in which factors drawn from clinical or epidemiologic literature weighed weakly, moderately, or strongly in favor of or against each type of diabetes. The two models were 89% congruent for T1D and 96% congruent for T2D. An endocrinologist reviewed and determined type for the 10% of patients for which results of the two models were not congruent or for which neither was able to determine type. Overall, 70% of our sample has T2D, 27% has T1D, and 3% has indeterminate or other diabetes. We will use this sample to validate survey questions to determine type of diabetes. Such "gold standard" determinations may support validation of new and improved methods for measuring diabetes type among the adult population. Disclosure: M. Kirkman: Research Support; Self; Bayer AG, Novo Nordisk A/S, Theracos, Inc. J.G. Nooney: None. S.R. Benoit: None. K.A. Bergamo: None. K.M. Bullard: None. J.R. Campione: None. R. Mardon: None. E. Pfaff: None. D.B. Rolka: None. S. Saydah: None. Funding: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems typically define laboratory test results using the Laboratory Observation Identifier Names and Codes (LOINC) and can transmit them using Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resource (FHIR) standards. LOINC has not yet been semantically integrated with computational resources for phenotype analysis. Here, we provide a method for mapping LOINC-encoded laboratory test results transmitted in FHIR standards to Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO) terms. We annotated the medical implications of 2923 commonly used laboratory tests with HPO terms. Using these annotations, our software assesses laboratory test results and converts each result into an HPO term. We validated our approach with EHR data from 15,681 patients with respiratory complaints and identified known biomarkers for asthma. Finally, we provide a freely available SMART on FHIR application that can be used within EHR systems. Our approach allows readily available laboratory tests in EHR to be reused for deep phenotyping and exploits the hierarchical structure of HPO to integrate distinct tests that have comparable medical interpretations for association studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]