Search

BackgroundClinical free-text data (eg, outpatient letters or nursing notes) represent a vast, untapped source of rich information that, if more accessible for research, would clarify and supplement information coded in structured data fields. Data usually need to be deidentified or anonymized before they can be reused for research, but there is a lack of established guidelines to govern effective deidentification and use of free-text information and avoid damaging data utility as a by-product. ObjectiveThis study aimed to develop recommendations for the creation of data governance standards to integrate with existing frameworks for personal data use, to enable free-text data to be used safely for research for patient and public benefit. MethodsWe outlined data protection legislation and regulations relating to the United Kingdom for context and conducted a rapid literature review and UK-based case studies to explore data governance models used in working with free-text data. We also engaged with stakeholders, including text-mining researchers and the general public, to explore perceived barriers and solutions in working with clinical free-text. ResultsWe proposed a set of recommendations, including the need for authoritative guidance on data governance for the reuse of free-text data, to ensure public transparency in data flows and uses, to treat deidentified free-text data as potentially identifiable with use limited to accredited data safe havens, and to commit to a culture of continuous improvement to understand the relationships between the efficacy of deidentification and reidentification risks, so this can be communicated to all stakeholders. ConclusionsBy drawing together the findings of a combination of activities, we present a position paper to contribute to the development of data governance standards for the reuse of clinical free-text data for secondary purposes. While working in accordance with existing data governance frameworks, there is a need for further work to take forward the recommendations we have proposed, with commitment and investment, to assure and expand the safe reuse of clinical free-text data for public benefit.

BackgroundResearch using genomic data opens up new insights into health and disease. Being able to use the data in association with health and administrative record data held in safe havens can multiply the benefits. However, there is much discussion about the use of genomic data with perceptions of particular challenges in doing so safely and effectively. ObjectiveThis study aimed to work toward a risk-utility data governance framework for research using genomic and phenotypic data in an anonymized form for research in safe havens. MethodsWe carried out a multifaceted review drawing upon data governance arrangements in published research, case studies of organizations working with genomic and phenotypic data, public views and expectations, and example studies using genomic and phenotypic data in combination. The findings were contextualized against a backdrop of legislative and regulatory requirements and used to create recommendations. ResultsWe proposed recommendations toward a risk-utility model with a flexible suite of controls to safeguard privacy and retain data utility for research. These were presented as overarching principles aligned to the core elements in the data sharing framework produced by the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health and as practical control measures distilled from published literature and case studies of operational safe havens to be applied as required at a project-specific level. ConclusionsThe recommendations presented can be used to contribute toward a proportionate data governance framework to promote the safe, socially acceptable use of genomic and phenotypic data in safe havens. They do not purport to eradicate risk but propose case-by-case assessment with transparency and accountability. If the risks are adequately understood and mitigated, there should be no reason that linked genomic and phenotypic data should not be used in an anonymized form for research in safe havens.

Data derived from the plethora of networked digital devices hold great potential for public benefit. Among these, mobile phone call detail records (CDRs) present novel opportunities for research and are being used in a variety of health geography studies. Research suggests that the public is amenable to the use of anonymized CDRs for research; however, further work is needed to show that such data can be used appropriately. This study works toward an ethically founded data governance framework with social acceptability. Using a multifaceted approach, this study draws upon data governance arrangements in published health research using CDRs, with a consideration of public views and the public’s information expectations from mobile network operators, and data use scenarios of CDRs in health research. The findings were considered against a backdrop of legislative and regulatory requirements. CDRs can be used at various levels of data and geographic granularity and may be integrated with additional, publicly available or restricted datasets. As such, there may be a significant risk of identity disclosure, which must be mitigated with proportionate control measures. An indicative relative risk of the disclosure model is proposed to aid this process. Subsequently, a set of recommendations is presented, including the need for greater transparency, accountability, and incorporation of public views for social acceptability. This study addresses the need for greater clarity and consistency in data governance for CDRs in health research. While recognizing the need to protect commercial interests, we propose that these recommendations be used to contribute toward an ethically founded practical framework to promote the safe, socially acceptable use of CDR data for public benefit. This pattern needs to be repeated for the appropriate use of new and emerging data types from other networking devices and the wider internet of things.

BackgroundMobile phone call detail records (CDRs) are increasingly being used in health research. The location element in CDRs is used in various health geographic studies, for example, to track population movement and infectious disease transmission. Vast volumes of CDRs are held by multinational organizations, which may make them available for research under various data governance regimes. However, there is an identified lack of public engagement on using CDRs for health research to contribute to an ethically founded framework. ObjectiveThis study aimed to explore public views on the use of call detail records in health research. MethodsViews on using CDRs in health research were gained via a series of three public workshops (N=61) informed by a pilot workshop of 25 people. The workshops included an initial questionnaire to gauge participants’ prior views, discussion on health research using CDRs, and a final questionnaire to record workshop outcome views. The resulting data were analyzed for frequencies and emerging themes. ResultsAt the outset, most participants (66%, 40/61) knew that location data were collected by operators, but only 3% (2/61) knew they were being used for health research. Initially, the majority of the participants (62%, 38/61) was content for their anonymous CDRs to be used, and this increased (80%, 49/61) after the discussion explained that safeguards were in place. Participants highlighted that terms and conditions should be clearer, as should information to phone users on data collection, privacy safeguards, sharing, and uses in research. ConclusionsThis is the first known study exploring public views of using mobile phone CDRs in health research. It revealed a lack of knowledge among the public on uses of CDRs and indicated that people are generally amenable to the use of anonymized data for research, but they want to be properly informed and safeguarded. We recommend that public views be incorporated into an ethically founded framework for the use of CDRs in health research to promote awareness and social acceptability in data use.

BackgroundCall detail records (CDRs) are collected by mobile network operators in the course of providing their service. CDRs are increasingly being used in research along with other forms of big data and represent an emerging data type with potential for public good. Many jurisdictions have infrastructures for health data research that could benefit from the integration of CDRs with health data. ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to review how CDRs have been used in health research and to identify challenges and potential opportunities for their wider use in conjunction with health data. MethodsA literature review was conducted using structured search terms making use of major search engines. Initially, 4066 items were identified. Following screening, 46 full text articles were included in the qualitative synthesis. Information extracted included research topic area, population of study, datasets used, information governance and ethical considerations, study findings, and data limitations. ResultsThe majority of published studies were focused on low-income and middle-income countries. Making use of the location element in CDRs, studies often modeled the transmission of infectious diseases or estimated population movement following natural disasters with a view to implementing interventions. CDRs were used in anonymized or aggregated form, and the process of gaining regulatory approvals varied with data provider and by jurisdiction. None included public views on the use of CDRs in health research. ConclusionsDespite various challenges and limitations, anonymized mobile phone CDRs have been used successfully in health research. The use of aggregated data is a safeguard but also a further limitation. Greater opportunities could be gained if validated anonymized CDRs were integrated with routine health records at an individual level, provided that permissions and safeguards could be put in place. Further work is needed, including gaining public views, to develop an ethically founded framework for the use of CDRs in health research.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the extent to which the inter-institutional, inter-disciplinary mobilisation of data and skills in the Farr Institute contributed to establishing the emerging field of data science for health in the UK.Design and outcome measuresWe evaluated evidence of six domains characterising a new field of science:defining central scientific challenges,demonstrating how the central challenges might be solved,creating novel interactions among groups of scientists,training new types of experts,re-organising universities,demonstrating impacts in society.We carried out citation, network and time trend analyses of publications, and a narrative review of infrastructure, methods and tools.SettingFour UK centres in London, North England, Scotland and Wales (23 university partners), 2013-2018.Results1. The Farr Institute helped define a central scientific challenge publishing a research corpus, demonstrating insights from electronic health record (EHR) and administrative data at each stage of the translational cycle in 593 papers with at least one Farr Institute author affiliation on PubMed. 2. The Farr Institute offered some demonstrations of how these scientific challenges might be solved: it established the first four ISO27001 certified trusted research environments in the UK, and approved more than 1000 research users, published on 102 unique EHR and administrative data sources, although there was no clear evidence of an increase in novel, sustained record linkages. The Farr Institute established open platforms for the EHR phenotyping algorithms and validations (>70 diseases, CALIBER). Sample sizes showed some evidence of increase but remained less than 10% of the UK population in primary care-hospital care linked studies. 3.The Farr Institute created novel interactions among researchers: the co-author publication network expanded from 944 unique co-authors (based on 67 publications in the first 30 months) to 3839 unique co-authors (545 papers in the final 30 months). 4. Training expanded substantially with 3 new masters courses, training >400 people at masters, short-course and leadership level and 48 PhD students. 5. Universities reorganised with 4/5 Centres established 27 new faculty (tenured) positions, 3 new university institutes. 6. Emerging evidence of impacts included: > 3200 citations for the 10 most cited papers and Farr research informed eight practice-changing clinical guidelines and policies relevant to the health of millions of UK citizens.ConclusionThe Farr Institute played a major role in establishing and growing the field of data science for health in the UK, with some initial evidence of benefits for health and healthcare. The Farr Institute has now expanded into Health Data Research (HDR) UK but key challenges remain including, how to network such activities internationally.

Objective: This study was undertaken to develop a novel pathway linking genetic data with routinely collected data for people with epilepsy, and to analyze the influence of rare, deleterious genetic variants on epilepsy outcomes. Methods: We linked whole‐exome sequencing (WES) data with routinely collected primary and secondary care data and natural language processing (NLP)‐derived seizure frequency information for people with epilepsy within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank. The study participants were adults who had consented to participate in the Swansea Neurology Biobank, Wales, between 2016 and 2018. DNA sequencing was carried out as part of the Epi25 collaboration. For each individual, we calculated the total number and cumulative burden of rare and predicted deleterious genetic variants and the total of rare and deleterious variants in epilepsy and drug metabolism genes. We compared these measures with the following outcomes: (1) no unscheduled hospital admissions versus unscheduled admissions for epilepsy, (2) antiseizure medication (ASM) monotherapy versus polytherapy, and (3) at least 1 year of seizure freedom versus <1 year of seizure freedom. Results: We linked genetic data for 107 individuals with epilepsy (52% female) to electronic health records. Twenty‐six percent had unscheduled hospital admissions, and 70% were prescribed ASM polytherapy. Seizure frequency information was linked for 100 individuals, and 10 were seizure‐free. There was no significant difference between the outcome groups in terms of the exome‐wide and gene‐based burden of rare and deleterious genetic variants. Significance: We successfully uploaded, annotated, and linked genetic sequence data and NLP‐derived seizure frequency data to anonymized health care records in this proof‐of‐concept study. We did not detect a genetic influence on real‐world epilepsy outcomes, but our study was limited by a small sample size. Future studies will require larger (WES) data to establish genetic variant contribution to epilepsy outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]