Search

ObjectiveBlockchain has emerged as a potential data-sharing structure in healthcare because of its decentralization, immutability, and traceability. However, its use in the biomedical domain is yet to be investigated comprehensively, especially from the aspects of implementation and evaluation, by existing blockchain literature reviews. To address this, our review assesses blockchain applications implemented in practice and evaluated with quantitative metrics.Materials and methodsThis systematic review adapts the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework to review biomedical blockchain papers published by August 2023 from 3 databases. Blockchain application, implementation, and evaluation metrics were collected and summarized.ResultsFollowing screening, 11 articles were included in this review. Articles spanned a range of biomedical applications including COVID-19 medical data sharing, decentralized internet of things (IoT) data storage, clinical trial management, biomedical certificate storage, electronic health record (EHR) data sharing, and distributed predictive model generation. Only one article demonstrated blockchain deployment at a medical facility.DiscussionEthereum was the most common blockchain platform. All but one implementation was developed with private network permissions. Also, 8 articles contained storage speed metrics and 6 contained query speed metrics. However, inconsistencies in presented metrics and the small number of articles included limit technological comparisons with each other.ConclusionWhile blockchain demonstrates feasibility for adoption in healthcare, it is not as popular as currently existing technologies for biomedical data management. Addressing implementation and evaluation factors will better showcase blockchain's practical benefits, enabling blockchain to have a significant impact on the health sector.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Early diagnosis of aortic stenosis (AS) is critical to prevent morbidity and mortality but requires skilled examination with Doppler imaging. This study reports the development and validation of a novel deep learning model that relies on two-dimensional (2D) parasternal long axis videos from transthoracic echocardiography without Doppler imaging to identify severe AS, suitable for point-of-care ultrasonography. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a training set of 5257 studies (17 570 videos) from 2016 to 2020 [Yale-New Haven Hospital (YNHH), Connecticut], an ensemble of three-dimensional convolutional neural networks was developed to detect severe AS, leveraging self-supervised contrastive pretraining for label-efficient model development. This deep learning model was validated in a temporally distinct set of 2040 consecutive studies from 2021 from YNHH as well as two geographically distinct cohorts of 4226 and 3072 studies, from California and other hospitals in New England, respectively. The deep learning model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.978 (95% CI: 0.966, 0.988) for detecting severe AS in the temporally distinct test set, maintaining its diagnostic performance in geographically distinct cohorts [0.952 AUROC (95% CI: 0.941, 0.963) in California and 0.942 AUROC (95% CI: 0.909, 0.966) in New England]. The model was interpretable with saliency maps identifying the aortic valve, mitral annulus, and left atrium as the predictive regions. Among non-severe AS cases, predicted probabilities were associated with worse quantitative metrics of AS suggesting an association with various stages of AS severity. CONCLUSION: This study developed and externally validated an automated approach for severe AS detection using single-view 2D echocardiography, with potential utility for point-of-care screening.

ObjectiveThis qualitative study aimed to understand patient and researcher perspectives regarding consent and data-sharing preferences for research and a patient-centered system to manage consent and data-sharing preferences.Materials and methodsWe conducted focus groups with patient and researcher participants recruited from three academic health centers via snowball sampling. Discussions focused on perspectives on the use of electronic health record (EHR) data for research. Themes were identified through consensus coding, starting from an exploratory framework.ResultsWe held two focus groups with patients (n = 12 patients) and two with researchers (n = 8 researchers). We identified two patient themes (1-2), one theme common to patients and researchers (3), and two researcher themes (4-5). Themes included (1) motivations for sharing EHR data, (2) perspectives on the importance of data-sharing transparency, (3) individual control of personal EHR data sharing, (4) how EHR data benefits research, and (5) challenges researchers face using EHR data.DiscussionPatients expressed a tension between the benefits of their data being used in studies to benefit themselves/others and avoiding risk by limiting data access. Patients resolved this tension by acknowledging they would often share their data but wanted greater transparency on its use. Researchers expressed concern about incorporating bias into datasets if patients opted out.ConclusionsA research consent and data-sharing platform must consider two competing goals: empowering patients to have more control over their data and maintaining the integrity of secondary data sources. Health systems and researchers should increase trust-building efforts with patients to engender trust in data access and use.

ObjectiveWe aimed to develop a distributed, immutable, and highly available cross-cloud blockchain system to facilitate federated data analysis activities among multiple institutions.Materials and methodsWe preprocessed 9166 COVID-19 Structured Query Language (SQL) code, summary statistics, and user activity logs, from the GitHub repository of the Reliable Response Data Discovery for COVID-19 (R2D2) Consortium. The repository collected local summary statistics from participating institutions and aggregated the global result to a COVID-19-related clinical query, previously posted by clinicians on a website. We developed both on-chain and off-chain components to store/query these activity logs and their associated queries/results on a blockchain for immutability, transparency, and high availability of research communication. We measured run-time efficiency of contract deployment, network transactions, and confirmed the accuracy of recorded logs compared to a centralized baseline solution.ResultsThe smart contract deployment took 4.5 s on an average. The time to record an activity log on blockchain was slightly over 2 s, versus 5-9 s for baseline. For querying, each query took on an average less than 0.4 s on blockchain, versus around 2.1 s for baseline.DiscussionThe low deployment, recording, and querying times confirm the feasibility of our cross-cloud, blockchain-based federated data analysis system. We have yet to evaluate the system on a larger network with multiple nodes per cloud, to consider how to accommodate a surge in activities, and to investigate methods to lower querying time as the blockchain grows.ConclusionBlockchain technology can be used to support federated data analysis among multiple institutions.

BACKGROUND: Validating new algorithms, such as methods to disentangle intrinsic treatment risk from risk associated with experiential learning of novel treatments, often requires knowing the ground truth for data characteristics under investigation. Since the ground truth is inaccessible in real world data, simulation studies using synthetic datasets that mimic complex clinical environments are essential. We describe and evaluate a generalizable framework for injecting hierarchical learning effects within a robust data generation process that incorporates the magnitude of intrinsic risk and accounts for known critical elements in clinical data relationships. METHODS: We present a multi-step data generating process with customizable options and flexible modules to support a variety of simulation requirements. Synthetic patients with nonlinear and correlated features are assigned to provider and institution case series. The probability of treatment and outcome assignment are associated with patient features based on user definitions. Risk due to experiential learning by providers and/or institutions when novel treatments are introduced is injected at various speeds and magnitudes. To further reflect real-world complexity, users can request missing values and omitted variables. We illustrate an implementation of our method in a case study using MIMIC-III data for reference patient feature distributions. RESULTS: Realized data characteristics in the simulated data reflected specified values. Apparent deviations in treatment effects and feature distributions, though not statistically significant, were most common in small datasets (n

Linking data across studies offers an opportunity to enrich data sets and provide a stronger basis for data-driven models for biomedical discovery and/or prognostication. Several techniques to link records have been proposed, and some have been implemented across data repositories holding molecular and clinical data. Not all these techniques guarantee appropriate privacy protection; there are trade-offs between (a) simple strategies that can be associated with data that will be linked and shared with any party and (b) more complex strategies that preserve the privacy of individuals across parties. We propose an intermediary, practical strategy to support linkage in studies that share de-identified data with Data Coordinating Centers. This technology can be extended to link data across multiple data hubs to support privacy preserving record linkage, considering data coordination centers and their awardees, which can be extended to a hierarchy of entities (e.g., awardees, data coordination centers, data hubs, etc.) b.

Background & aimsThere are limited data on outcomes of biologic therapy in Hispanic patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). We compared risk of hospitalization, surgery, and serious infections in Hispanic vs non-Hispanic patients with IBD in a multicenter, electronic health record-based cohort of biologic-treated patients.MethodsWe identified adult patients with IBD who were new users of biologic agents (tumor necrosis factor α [TNF-α] antagonists, ustekinumab, vedolizumab) from 5 academic institutions in California between 2010 and 2017. We compared the risk of all-cause hospitalization, IBD-related surgery, and serious infections in Hispanic vs non-Hispanic patients using 1:4 propensity score matching and survival analysis.ResultsWe compared 240 Hispanic patients (53% male; 45% with ulcerative colitis; 73% TNF-α antagonist-treated; 20% with prior biologic exposure) with 960 non-Hispanic patients (51% male; 44% with ulcerative colitis; 67% TNF-α antagonist-treated; 27% with prior biologic exposure). After propensity score matching, Hispanic patients were younger (37 ± 15 vs 40 ± 16 y; P = .02) and had a higher burden of comorbidities (Elixhauser index, >0; 37% vs 26%; P < .01), without any differences in patterns of medication use, burden of inflammation, and hospitalizations. Within 1 year of biologic initiation, Hispanic patients had higher rates of hospitalizations (31% vs 23%; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.32; 95% CI, 1.01-1.74) and IBD-related surgery (7.1% vs 4.6%; aHR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.07-3.72), with a trend toward higher risk of serious infections (8.8% vs 4.9%; aHR, 1.74; 95% CI, 0.99-3.05).ConclusionsIn a multicenter, propensity score-matched cohort of biologic-treated patients with IBD, Hispanic patients experienced higher rates of hospitalization, surgery, and serious infections. Future studies are needed to investigate the biological, social, and environmental drivers of these differences.

The All of Us (AoU) Research Program is making available one of the largest and most diverse collections of health data in the US to researchers. Using the All of Us database, we evaluated family and personal histories of five common types of cancer in 89,453 individuals, comparing these data to 24,305 participants from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). Comparing datasets, we found similar family cancer history (33%) rates, but higher personal cancer history in the AoU dataset (9.2% in AoU vs. 5.11% in NHIS), Methodological (e.g. survey-versus telephone-based data collection) and demographic variability may explain these between-data differences, but more research is needed.

Concerns regarding inappropriate leakage of sensitive personal information as well as unauthorized data use are increasing with the growth of genomic data repositories. Therefore, privacy and security of genomic data have become increasingly important and need to be studied. With many proposed protection techniques, their applicability in support of biomedical research should be well understood. For this purpose, we have organized a community effort in the past 8 years through the integrating data for analysis, anonymization and sharing consortium to address this practical challenge. In this article, we summarize our experience from these competitions, report lessons learned from the events in 2020/2021 as examples, and discuss potential future research directions in this emerging field.

Accurate, highly specific immunoassays for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are needed to evaluate seroprevalence. This study investigated the concordance of results across four immunoassays targeting different antigens for sera collected at the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in the United States. Specimens from All of Us participants contributed between January and March 2020 were tested using the Abbott Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG (immunoglobulin G) assay (Abbott) and the EuroImmun SARS-CoV-2 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (EI). Participants with discordant results, participants with concordant positive results, and a subset of concordant negative results by Abbott and EI were also tested using the Roche Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 (IgG) test (Roche) and the Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics Vitros anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG test (Ortho). The agreement and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for paired assay combinations. SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentrations were quantified for specimens with at least two positive results across four immunoassays. Among the 24,079 participants, the percent agreement for the Abbott and EI assays was 98.8% (95% confidence interval, 98.7%, 99%). Of the 490 participants who were also tested by Ortho and Roche, the probability-weighted percentage of agreement (95% confidence interval) between Ortho and Roche was 98.4% (97.9%, 98.9%), that between EI and Ortho was 98.5% (92.9%, 99.9%), that between Abbott and Roche was 98.9% (90.3%, 100.0%), that between EI and Roche was 98.9% (98.6%, 100.0%), and that between Abbott and Ortho was 98.4% (91.2%, 100.0%). Among the 32 participants who were positive by at least 2 immunoassays, 21 had quantifiable anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentrations by research assays. The results across immunoassays revealed concordance during a period of low prevalence. However, the frequency of false positivity during a period of low prevalence supports the use of two sequentially performed tests for unvaccinated individuals who are seropositive by the first test. IMPORTANCE What is the agreement of commercial SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) assays during a time of low coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prevalence and no vaccine availability? Serological tests produced concordant results in a time of low SARS-CoV-2 prevalence and no vaccine availability, driven largely by the proportion of samples that were negative by two immunoassays. The CDC recommends two sequential tests for positivity for future pandemic preparedness. In a subset analysis, quantified antinucleocapsid and antispike SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies do not suggest the need to specify the antigen targets of the sequential assays in the CDC's recommendation because false positivity varied as much between assays targeting the same antigen as it did between assays targeting different antigens.

The All of Us Research Program seeks to engage at least one million diverse participants to advance precision medicine and improve human health. We describe here the cloud-based Researcher Workbench that uses a data passport model to democratize access to analytical tools and participant information including survey, physical measurement, and electronic health record (EHR) data. We also present validation study findings for several common complex diseases to demonstrate use of this novel platform in 315,000 participants, 78% of whom are from groups historically underrepresented in biomedical research, including 49% self-reporting non-White races. Replication findings include medication usage pattern differences by race in depression and type 2 diabetes, validation of known cancer associations with smoking, and calculation of cardiovascular risk scores by reported race effects. The cloud-based Researcher Workbench represents an important advance in enabling secure access for a broad range of researchers to this large resource and analytical tools.

Broad health data sharing raises myriad ethical issues related to data protection and privacy. These issues are of particular relevance to Native Americans, who reserve distinct individual and collective rights to control data about their communities. We sought to gather input from tribal community leaders on how best to understand health data privacy and sharing preferences in this population. We conducted a workshop with 14 tribal leaders connected to the Strong Heart Study to codesign a research study to assess preferences concerning health data privacy for biomedical research. Workshop participants provided specific recommendations regarding who should be consulted, what questions should be posed, and what methods should be used, underscoring the importance of relationship-building between researchers and tribal communities. Biomedical researchers and informaticians who collect and analyze health information from Native communities have a unique responsibility to safeguard these data in ways that align to the preferences of specific communities.

BackgroundWith limited severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) testing capacity in the United States at the start of the epidemic (January-March 2020), testing was focused on symptomatic patients with a travel history throughout February, obscuring the picture of SARS-CoV-2 seeding and community transmission. We sought to identify individuals with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the early weeks of the US epidemic.MethodsAll of Us study participants in all 50 US states provided blood specimens during study visits from 2 January to 18 March 2020. Participants were considered seropositive if they tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies with the Abbott Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and the EUROIMMUN SARS-CoV-2 ELISA in a sequential testing algorithm. The sensitivity and specificity of these ELISAs and the net sensitivity and specificity of the sequential testing algorithm were estimated, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsThe estimated sensitivities of the Abbott and EUROIMMUN assays were 100% (107 of 107 [95% CI: 96.6%-100%]) and 90.7% (97 of 107 [83.5%-95.4%]), respectively, and the estimated specificities were 99.5% (995 of 1000 [98.8%-99.8%]) and 99.7% (997 of 1000 [99.1%-99.9%]), respectively. The net sensitivity and specificity of our sequential testing algorithm were 90.7% (97 of 107 [95% CI: 83.5%-95.4%]) and 100.0% (1000 of 1000 [99.6%-100%]), respectively. Of the 24 079 study participants with blood specimens from 2 January to 18 March 2020, 9 were seropositive, 7 before the first confirmed case in the states of Illinois, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Mississippi.ConclusionsOur findings identified SARS-CoV-2 infections weeks before the first recognized cases in 5 US states.

IntroductionThe NIH All of Us Research Program will have the scale and scope to enable research for a wide range of diseases, including cancer. The program's focus on diversity and inclusion promises a better understanding of the unequal burden of cancer. Preliminary cancer ascertainment in the All of Us cohort from two data sources (self-reported versus electronic health records (EHR)) is considered.Materials and methodsThis work was performed on data collected from the All of Us Research Program's 315,297 enrolled participants to date using the Researcher Workbench, where approved researchers can access and analyze All of Us data on cancer and other diseases. Cancer case ascertainment was performed using data from EHR and self-reported surveys across key factors. Distribution of cancer types and concordance of data sources by cancer site and demographics is analyzed.Results and discussionData collected from 315,297 participants resulted in 13,298 cancer cases detected in the survey (in 89,261 participants), 23,520 cancer cases detected in the EHR (in 203,813 participants), and 7,123 cancer cases detected across both sources (in 62,497 participants). Key differences in survey completion by race/ethnicity impacted the makeup of cohorts when compared to cancer in the EHR and national NCI SEER data.ConclusionsThis study provides key insight into cancer detection in the All of Us Research Program and points to the existing strengths and limitations of All of Us as a platform for cancer research now and in the future.

The U.S. National Library of Medicine's (NLM) funding for biomedical informatics research in the 1980s and 1990s focused on clinical decision support systems, which were also the focus of research for Donald A.B. Lindberg M.D. prior to becoming NLM's director. The portfolio of projects expanded over the years. At NLM, Dr. Lindberg supported various large infrastructure programs that enabled biomedical informatics research, as well as investigator-initiated research projects that increasingly included biotechnology/bioinformatics and health services research. The authors review NLM's sponsorship of research during Dr. Lindberg's tenure as its Director. NLM's funding significantly increased in the 2000's and beyond. Authors report an analysis of R01 topics from 1985-2016 using data from NIH RePORTER. Dr. Lindberg's legacy for biomedical informatics research is reflected by the research NLM supported under his leadership. The number of R01s remained steady over the years, but the funds provided within awards increased over time. A significant amount of NLM funds listed in RePORTER went into various types of infrastructure projects that laid a solid foundation for biomedical informatics research over multiple decades.

IntroductionNational obesity prevention strategies may benefit from precision health approaches involving diverse participants in population health studies. We used cohort data from the National Institutes of Health All of Us Research Program (All of Us) Researcher Workbench to estimate population-level obesity prevalence.MethodsTo estimate state-level obesity prevalence we used data from physical measurements made during All of Us enrollment visits and data from participant electronic health records (EHRs) where available. Prevalence estimates were calculated and mapped by state for 2 categories of body mass index (BMI) (kg/m2): obesity (BMI >30) and severe obesity (BMI >35). We calculated and mapped prevalence by state, excluding states with fewer than 100 All of Us participants.ResultsData on height and weight were available for 244,504 All of Us participants from 33 states, and corresponding EHR data were available for 88,840 of these participants. The median and IQR of BMI taken from physical measurements data was 28.4 (24.4- 33.7) and 28.5 (24.5-33.6) from EHR data, where available. Overall obesity prevalence based on physical measurements data was 41.5% (95% CI, 41.3%-41.7%); prevalence of severe obesity was 20.7% (95% CI, 20.6-20.9), with large geographic variations observed across states. Prevalence estimates from states with greater numbers of All of Us participants were more similar to national population-based estimates than states with fewer participants.ConclusionAll of Us participants had a high prevalence of obesity, with state-level geographic variation mirroring national trends. The diversity among All of Us participants may support future investigations on obesity prevention and treatment in diverse populations.

BackgroundBlockchain distributed ledger technology is just starting to be adopted in genomics and healthcare applications. Despite its increased prevalence in biomedical research applications, skepticism regarding the practicality of blockchain technology for real-world problems is still strong and there are few implementations beyond proof-of-concept. We focus on benchmarking blockchain strategies applied to distributed methods for sharing records of gene-drug interactions. We expect this type of sharing will expedite personalized medicine.Basic proceduresWe generated gene-drug interaction test datasets using the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) resource. We developed three blockchain-based methods to share patient records on gene-drug interactions: Query Index, Index Everything, and Dual-Scenario Indexing.Main findingsWe achieved a runtime of about 60 s for importing 4,000 gene-drug interaction records from four sites, and about 0.5 s for a data retrieval query. Our results demonstrated that it is feasible to leverage blockchain as a new platform to share data among institutions.Principal conclusionsWe show the benchmarking results of novel blockchain-based methods for institutions to share patient outcomes related to gene-drug interactions. Our findings support blockchain utilization in healthcare, genomic and biomedical applications. The source code is publicly available at https://github.com/tsungtingkuo/genedrug.

Background & aimsOld age must be considered in weighing the risks of complications vs benefits of treatment for patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). We conducted a nationally representative cohort study to estimate the independent effects of frailty on burden, costs, and causes for hospitalization in patients with IBD.MethodsWe searched the Nationwide Readmissions Database to identify 47,402 patients with IBD, hospitalized from January through June 2013 and followed for readmission through December 31, 2013. Based on a validated hospital frailty risk scoring system, 15,507 patients were considered frail and 31,895 were considered non-frail at index admission. We evaluated the independent effect of frailty on longitudinal burden and costs of hospitalization, inpatient mortality, risk of readmission and surgery, and reasons for readmission.ResultsOver a median follow-up time of 10 months, adjusting for age, sex, income, comorbidity index, depression, obesity, severity, and indication for index hospitalization, frailty was independently associated with 57% higher risk of mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.57; 95% CI, 1.34-1.83), 21% higher risk of all-cause readmission (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.21; 95% CI, 1.17-1.25), and 22% higher risk of readmission for severe IBD (aHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.16-1.29). Frail patients with IBD spent more days in the hospital annually (median 9 days; interquartile range, 4-18 days vs median 5 days for non-frail patients; interquartile range, 3-10 days; P < .01) with higher costs of hospitalization ($17,791; interquartile range, $8368-$38,942 vs $10,924 for non-frail patients, interquartile range, $5571-$22,632; P < .01). Infections, rather than IBD, were the leading cause of hospitalization for frail patients.ConclusionsFrailty is independently associated with higher mortality and burden of hospitalization in patients with IBD; infections are the leading cause of hospitalization. Frailty should be considered in treatment approach, especially in older patients with IBD.

ObjectiveTo utilize, in an individual and institutional privacy-preserving manner, electronic health record (EHR) data from 202 hospitals by analyzing answers to COVID-19-related questions and posting these answers online.Materials and methodsWe developed a distributed, federated network of 12 health systems that harmonized their EHRs and submitted aggregate answers to consortia questions posted at https://www.covid19questions.org. Our consortium developed processes and implemented distributed algorithms to produce answers to a variety of questions. We were able to generate counts, descriptive statistics, and build a multivariate, iterative regression model without centralizing individual-level data.ResultsOur public website contains answers to various clinical questions, a web form for users to ask questions in natural language, and a list of items that are currently pending responses. The results show, for example, that patients who were taking angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers, within the year before admission, had lower unadjusted in-hospital mortality rates. We also showed that, when adjusted for, age, sex, and ethnicity were not significantly associated with mortality. We demonstrated that it is possible to answer questions about COVID-19 using EHR data from systems that have different policies and must follow various regulations, without moving data out of their health systems.Discussion and conclusionsWe present an alternative or a complement to centralized COVID-19 registries of EHR data. We can use multivariate distributed logistic regression on observations recorded in the process of care to generate results without transferring individual-level data outside the health systems.

PurposeTo (1) use All of Us (AoU) data to validate a previously published single-center model predicting the need for surgery among individuals with glaucoma, (2) train new models using AoU data, and (3) share insights regarding this novel data source for ophthalmic research.DesignDevelopment and evaluation of machine learning models.MethodsElectronic health record data were extracted from AoU for 1,231 adults diagnosed with primary open-angle glaucoma. The single-center model was applied to AoU data for external validation. AoU data were then used to train new models for predicting the need for glaucoma surgery using multivariable logistic regression, artificial neural networks, and random forests. Five-fold cross-validation was performed. Model performance was evaluated based on area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, precision, and recall.ResultsThe mean (standard deviation) age of the AoU cohort was 69.1 (10.5) years, with 57.3% women and 33.5% black, significantly exceeding representation in the single-center cohort (P = .04 and P < .001, respectively). Of 1,231 participants, 286 (23.2%) needed glaucoma surgery. When applying the single-center model to AoU data, accuracy was 0.69 and AUC was only 0.49. Using AoU data to train new models resulted in superior performance: AUCs ranged from 0.80 (logistic regression) to 0.99 (random forests).ConclusionsModels trained with national AoU data achieved superior performance compared with using single-center data. Although AoU does not currently include ophthalmic imaging, it offers several strengths over similar big-data sources such as claims data. AoU is a promising new data source for ophthalmic research.

Background & aimsWe estimated the prevalence of social determinants of health (SDH, food insecurity and social support) in adults with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) in the United States and evaluated associations with financial toxicity and healthcare use.MethodsIn the National Health Interview Survey 2015, we identified adults with IBD and estimated the prevalence of food insecurity and/or lack of social support. We evaluated associations with financial toxicity (financial hardship due to medical bills, personal and health-related financial distress, cost-related medication nonadherence, healthcare affordability) and emergency department use.ResultsOf estimated 3.1 million adults with IBD in the US, 42% or estimated 1,277,215 patients with IBD reported at least one negative SDH, with 12% reporting both food insecurity and lack of social support. On multivariable analysis adjusting for age, sex, race, family income and comorbidities, patients with food insecurity were significantly more likely to experience financial hardship due to medical bills (odds ratio [OR], 3.31; 95% CI, 1.48-7.39), financial distress (OR, 6.92; 95% CI, 2.28-21.0) and cost-related medication non-adherence (OR, 8.07; 95% CI, 3.16-20.6). Similarly, patients with inadequate social support were significantly more likely to experience financial hardship due to medical bills (OR, 2.98; 95% CI, 1.56-5.67), financial distress (OR, 3.05; 95% CI, 1.64-5.67) and cost-related medication non-adherence (OR, 2.71; 95% CI, 1.10-6.66). Food insecurity and/or lack of social support was not associated with increased risk of emergency department use.ConclusionsIn an analysis of data from the National Health Interview Survey 2015, we found that 1 in 8 patients with IBD have food insecurity and lack social support, which is associated with higher financial toxicity. Patients with IBD should be assessed for SDH to tailor healthcare delivery and improve population health.

The All of Us Research Program was designed to enable broad-based precision medicine research in a cohort of unprecedented scale and diversity. Hypertension (HTN) is a major public health concern. The validity of HTN data and definition of hypertension cases in the All of Us (AoU) Research Program for use in rule-based algorithms is unknown. In this cross-sectional, population-based study, we compare HTN prevalence in the AoU Research Program to HTN prevalence in the 2015-2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). We used AoU baseline data from patient (age ≥ 18) measurements (PM), surveys, and electronic health record (EHR) blood pressure measurements. We retrospectively examined the prevalence of HTN in the EHR cohort using Systemized Nomenclature of Medicine (SNOMED) codes and blood pressure medications recorded in the EHR. We defined HTN as the participant having at least 2 HTN diagnosis/billing codes on separate dates in the EHR data AND at least one HTN medication. We calculated an age-standardized HTN prevalence according to the age distribution of the U.S. Census, using 3 groups (18-39, 40-59, and ≥ 60). Among the 185,770 participants enrolled in the AoU Cohort (mean age at enrollment = 51.2 years) available in a Researcher Workbench as of October 2019, EHR data was available for at least one SNOMED code from 112,805 participants, medications for 104,230 participants, and 103,490 participants had both medication and SNOMED data. The total number of persons with SNOMED codes on at least two distinct dates and at least one antihypertensive medication was 33,310 for a crude prevalence of HTN of 32.2%. AoU age-adjusted HTN prevalence was 27.9% using 3 groups compared to 29.6% in NHANES. The AoU cohort is a growing source of diverse longitudinal data to study hypertension nationwide and develop precision rule-based algorithms for use in hypertension treatment and prevention research. The prevalence of hypertension in this cohort is similar to that in prior population-based surveys.

BackgroundWith limited SARS-CoV-2 testing capacity in the US at the start of the epidemic (January - March), testing was focused on symptomatic patients with a travel history throughout February, obscuring the picture of SARS-CoV-2 seeding and community transmission. We sought to identify individuals with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the early weeks of the US epidemic.MethodsAll of Us study participants in all 50 US states provided blood specimens during study visits from January 2 to March 18, 2020. A participant was considered seropositive if they tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies on the Abbott Architect SARS-CoV-2 IgG ELISA and the EUROIMMUN SARS-CoV-2 ELISA in a sequential testing algorithm. Sensitivity and specificity of the Abbott and EUROIMMUNE ELISAs and the net sensitivity and specificity of the sequential testing algorithm were estimated with 95% confidence intervals.ResultsThe estimated sensitivity of Abbott and EUROIMMUN was 100% (107/107 [96.6%, 100%]) and 90.7% (97/107 [83.5%, 95.4%]), respectively. The estimated specificity of Abbott and EUROIMMUN was 99.5% (995/1,000 [98.8%, 99.8%]) and 99.7% (997/1,000 [99.1%, 99.9%), respectively. The net sensitivity and specificity of our sequential testing algorithm was 90.7% (97/107 [83.5%, 95.4%]) and 100.0% (1,000/1,000 [99.6%, 100%]), respectively. Of the 24,079 study participants with blood specimens from January 2 to March 18, 2020, 9 were seropositive, 7 of whom were seropositive prior to the first confirmed case in the states of Illinois, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Mississippi.ConclusionsOur findings indicate SARS-CoV-2 infections weeks prior to the first recognized cases in 5 US states.

Our goal is to summarize the collective experience of 15 organizations in dealing with uncoordinated efforts that result in unnecessary delays in understanding, predicting, preparing for, containing, and mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. Response efforts involve the collection and analysis of data corresponding to healthcare organizations, public health departments, socioeconomic indicators, as well as additional signals collected directly from individuals and communities. We focused on electronic health record (EHR) data, since EHRs can be leveraged and scaled to improve clinical care, research, and to inform public health decision-making. We outline the current challenges in the data ecosystem and the technology infrastructure that are relevant to COVID-19, as witnessed in our 15 institutions. The infrastructure includes registries and clinical data networks to support population-level analyses. We propose a specific set of strategic next steps to increase interoperability, overall organization, and efficiencies.

Our goal is to summarize the collective experience of 15 organizations in dealing with uncoordinated efforts that result in unnecessary delays in understanding, predicting, preparing for, containing, and mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. Response efforts involve the collection and analysis of data corresponding to healthcare organizations, public health departments, socioeconomic indicators, as well as additional signals collected directly from individuals and communities. We focused on electronic health record (EHR) data, since EHRs can be leveraged and scaled to improve clinical care, research, and to inform public health decision-making. We outline the current challenges in the data ecosystem and the technology infrastructure that are relevant to COVID-19, as witnessed in our 15 institutions. The infrastructure includes registries and clinical data networks to support population-level analyses. We propose a specific set of strategic next steps to increase interoperability, overall organization, and efficiencies.

BackgroundPrivacy-related concerns can prevent equitable participation in health research by US Indigenous communities. However, studies focused on these communities' views regarding health data privacy, including systematic reviews, are lacking.MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature review analyzing empirical, US-based studies involving American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) and Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (NHPI) perspectives on health data privacy, which we define as the practice of maintaining the security and confidentiality of an individual's personal health records and/or biological samples (including data derived from biological specimens, such as personal genetic information), as well as the secure and approved use of those data.ResultsTwenty-one studies involving 3234 AI/AN and NHPI participants were eligible for review. The results of this review suggest that concerns about the privacy of health data are both prevalent and complex in AI/AN and NHPI communities. Many respondents raised concerns about the potential for misuse of their health data, including discrimination or stigma, confidentiality breaches, and undesirable or unknown uses of biological specimens.ConclusionsParticipants cited a variety of individual and community-level concerns about the privacy of their health data, and indicated that these deter their willingness to participate in health research. Future investigations should explore in more depth which health data privacy concerns are most salient to specific AI/AN and NHPI communities, and identify the practices that will make the collection and use of health data more trustworthy and transparent for participants.

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) have been growingly recognized as biomarkers and mediators of alcoholic liver disease (ALD) in human and mice. Here we characterized hepatocyte-derived EVs (HC-EVs) and their cargo for their biological functions in a novel murine model that closely resembles liver pathology observed in patients with alcoholic hepatitis (AH), the most severe spectrum of ALD. The numbers of circulating EVs and HC-EVs were significantly increased by 10-fold in AH mice compared with control mice. The miRNA (miR)-seq analysis detected 20 upregulated and 4 downregulated miRNAs (P

ObjectivePredicting patient outcomes using healthcare/genomics data is an increasingly popular/important area. However, some diseases are rare and require data from multiple institutions to construct generalizable models. To address institutional data protection policies, many distributed methods keep the data locally but rely on a central server for coordination, which introduces risks such as a single point of failure. We focus on providing an alternative based on a decentralized approach. We introduce the idea using blockchain technology for this purpose, with a brief description of its own potential advantages/disadvantages.Materials and methodsWe explain how our proposed EXpectation Propagation LOgistic REgRession on Permissioned blockCHAIN (ExplorerChain) can achieve the same results when compared to a distributed model that uses a central server on 3 healthcare/genomic datasets, and what trade-offs need to be considered when using centralized/decentralized methods. We explain how the use of blockchain technology can help decrease some of the problems encountered in decentralized methods.ResultsWe showed that the discrimination power of ExplorerChain can be statistically similar to its counterpart central server-based algorithm. While ExplorerChain inherited some benefits of blockchain, it had a small increased running time.DiscussionExplorerChain has the same prerequisites as a distributed model with a centralized server for coordination. In a manner similar to secure multi-party computation strategies, it assumes that participating institutions are honest, but "curious."ConclusionWhen evaluated on relatively small datasets, results suggest that ExplorerChain, which combines artificial intelligence and blockchain technologies, performs as well as a central server-based method, and may avoid some risks at the cost of efficiency.

ObjectiveTo evaluate informatics-enabled quality improvement (QI) strategies for promoting time spent on face-to-face communication between ophthalmologists and patients.MethodsThis prospective study involved deploying QI strategies during implementation of an enterprise-wide vendor electronic health record (EHR) in an outpatient academic ophthalmology department. Strategies included developing single sign-on capabilities, activating mobile- and tablet-based applications, EHR personalization training, creating novel workflows for team-based orders, and promoting problem-based charting to reduce documentation burden. Timing data were collected during 648 outpatient encounters. Outcomes included total time spent by the attending ophthalmologist on the patient, time spent on documentation, time spent on examination, and time spent talking with the patient. Metrics related to documentation efficiency, use of personalization features, use of team-based orders, and note length were also measured from the EHR efficiency portal and compared with averages for ophthalmologists nationwide using the same EHR.ResultsTime spent on exclusive face-to-face communication with patients initially decreased with EHR implementation (2.9 to 2.3 minutes, p = 0.005) but returned to the paper baseline by 6 months (2.8 minutes, p = 0.99). Observed participants outperformed national averages of ophthalmologists using the same vendor system on documentation time per appointment, number of customized note templates, number of customized order lists, utilization of team-based orders, note length, and time spent after-hours on EHR use.ConclusionInformatics-enabled QI interventions can promote patient-centeredness and face-to-face communication in high-volume outpatient ophthalmology encounters. By employing an array of interventions, time spent exclusively talking with the patient returned to levels equivalent to paper charts by 6 months after EHR implementation. This was achieved without requiring EHR redesign, use of scribes, or excessive after-hours work. Documentation efficiency can be achieved using interventions promoting personalization and team-based workflows. Given their efficacy in preserving face-to-face physician-patient interactions, these strategies may help alleviate risk of physician burnout.

PurposeTo predict the need for surgical intervention in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) using systemic data in electronic health records (EHRs).DesignDevelopment and evaluation of machine learning models.MethodsStructured EHR data of 385 POAG patients from a single academic institution were incorporated into models using multivariable logistic regression, random forests, and artificial neural networks. Leave-one-out cross-validation was performed. Mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and Youden index were calculated for each model to evaluate performance. Systemic variables driving predictions were identified and interpreted.ResultsMultivariable logistic regression was most effective at discriminating patients with progressive disease requiring surgery, with an AUC of 0.67. Higher mean systolic blood pressure was associated with significantly increased odds of needing glaucoma surgery (odds ratio [OR] = 1.09, P < .001). Ophthalmic medications (OR = 0.28, P < .001), non-opioid analgesic medications (OR = 0.21, P = .002), anti-hyperlipidemic medications (OR = 0.39, P = .004), macrolide antibiotics (OR = 0.40, P = .03), and calcium blockers (OR = 0.43, P = .03) were associated with decreased odds of needing glaucoma surgery.ConclusionsExisting systemic data in the EHR has some predictive value in identifying POAG patients at risk of progression to surgical intervention, even in the absence of eye-specific data. Blood pressure-related metrics and certain medication classes emerged as predictors of glaucoma progression. This approach provides an opportunity for future development of automated risk prediction within the EHR based on systemic data to assist with clinical decision-making.

PurposeTo assess time requirements for patient encounters and estimate after-hours demands of paper-based clinical workflows in ophthalmology.DesignTime-and-motion study with a structured survey.MethodsThis study was conducted in a single academic ophthalmology department. A convenience sample consisted of 7 attending ophthalmologists from 6 subspecialties observed during 414 patient encounters for the time-motion analysis and 12 attending ophthalmologists for the survey. Outcome measurements consisted of total time spent by attending ophthalmologists per patient and time spent on documentation, examination, and talking with patients. The survey assessed time requirements of documentation-related activities performed outside of scheduled clinic hours.ResultsAmong the 7 attending ophthalmologists observed (6 men and 1 woman), mean ± SD age 43.9 ± 7.1 years, during encounters with 414 patients (57.8 ± 24.6 years of age), total time spent per patient was 8.1 ± 4.8 minutes, with 2.8 ± 1.4 minutes (38%) for documentation, 1.2 ± 0.9 minutes (17%) for examination, and 3.3 ± 3.1 minutes (37%) for talking with patients. New patient evaluations required significantly more time than routine follow-up visits and postoperative visits. Higher clinical volumes were associated with less time per patient. Survey results indicated that paper-based documentation was associated with minimal after-hours work on weeknights and weekends.ConclusionsPaper-based documentation takes up a substantial portion of the total time spent for patient care in outpatient ophthalmology clinics but is associated with minimal after-hours work. Understanding paper-based clinical workflows may help inform targeted strategies for improving electronic health record use in ophthalmology.

ObjectiveElectronic health records (EHRs) are widely adopted, but the time demands of EHR use on ophthalmology trainees are not well understood. This study evaluated ophthalmology trainee time spent on clinical activities in an outpatient clinic undergoing EHR implementation.DesignProspective, manual time-motion observations of ophthalmology trainees in 2018.ParticipantsEleven ophthalmology residents and fellows observed during 156 patient encounters.MethodsProspective time-motion study of ophthalmology trainees 2 weeks before and 6 weeks after EHR implementation in an academic ophthalmology department. Manual time-motion observations were conducted for 11 ophthalmology trainees in 6 subspecialty clinics during 156 patient encounters. Time spent documenting, examining, and talking with patients were recorded. Factors influencing time requirements were evaluated using linear mixed effects models.Main outcome measuresTotal time spent by ophthalmology residents and fellows per patient, time spent on documentation, examination, and talking with patients.ResultsSeven ophthalmology residents and four ophthalmology fellows with mean (standard deviation) postgraduate year of 3.7 (1.2) were observed during 156 patient encounters. Using paper charts, mean total time spent on each patient was 11.6 (6.5) minutes, with 5.4 (3.5) minutes spent documenting (48%). After EHR implementation, mean total time spent on each patient was 11.8 (6.9) minutes, with 6.8 (4.7) minutes spent documenting (57%). Total time expenditure per patient did not significantly change after EHR implementation (+0.17 minutes, 95% confidence interval [CI] for difference in means: -2.78, 2.45; p = 0.90). Documentation time did not change significantly after EHR implementation in absolute terms (+1.42 minutes, 95% CI: -3.13, 0.29; p = 0.10), but was significantly greater as a proportion of total time (48% on paper to 57% on EHR; +9%, 95% CI: 2.17, 15.83; p = 0.011).ConclusionTotal time spent per patient and absolute time spent on documentation was not significantly different whether ophthalmology trainees used paper charts or the recently implemented EHR. Percentage of total time spent on documentation increased significantly with early EHR use. Evaluating EHR impact on ophthalmology trainees may improve understanding of how trainees learn to use the EHR and may shed light on strategies to address trainee burnout.

ObjectivesTo introduce healthcare or biomedical blockchain applications and their underlying blockchain platforms, compare popular blockchain platforms using a systematic review method, and provide a reference for selection of a suitable blockchain platform given requirements and technical features that are common in healthcare and biomedical research applications.Target audienceHealthcare or clinical informatics researchers and software engineers who would like to learn about the important technical features of different blockchain platforms to design and implement blockchain-based health informatics applications.ScopeCovered topics include (1) a brief introduction to healthcare or biomedical blockchain applications and the benefits to adopt blockchain; (2) a description of key features of underlying blockchain platforms in healthcare applications; (3) development of a method for systematic review of technology, based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement, to investigate blockchain platforms for healthcare and medicine applications; (4) a review of 21 healthcare-related technical features of 10 popular blockchain platforms; and (5) a discussion of findings and limitations of the review.

ObjectiveDecentralized privacy-preserving predictive modeling enables multiple institutions to learn a more generalizable model on healthcare or genomic data by sharing the partially trained models instead of patient-level data, while avoiding risks such as single point of control. State-of-the-art blockchain-based methods remove the "server" role but can be less accurate than models that rely on a server. Therefore, we aim at developing a general model sharing framework to preserve predictive correctness, mitigate the risks of a centralized architecture, and compute the models in a fair way.Materials and methodsWe propose a framework that includes both server and "client" roles to preserve correctness. We adopt a blockchain network to obtain the benefits of decentralization, by alternating the roles for each site to ensure computational fairness. Also, we developed GloreChain (Grid Binary LOgistic REgression on Permissioned BlockChain) as a concrete example, and compared it to a centralized algorithm on 3 healthcare or genomic datasets to evaluate predictive correctness, number of learning iterations and execution time.ResultsGloreChain performs exactly the same as the centralized method in terms of correctness and number of iterations. It inherits the advantages of blockchain, at the cost of increased time to reach a consensus model.DiscussionOur framework is general or flexible and can also address intrinsic challenges of blockchain networks. Further investigations will focus on higher-dimensional datasets, additional use cases, privacy-preserving quality concerns, and ethical, legal, and social implications.ConclusionsOur framework provides a promising potential for institutions to learn a predictive model based on healthcare or genomic data in a privacy-preserving and decentralized way.

The willing participation of patients in clinical research is a critical element in national efforts to collect health data for precision medicine and large cohort studies. However, recruiting patients is challenging. Clinical data research networks (CDRN) have primarily been used for observational studies, but may be able to enhance recruitment efforts. We need a better understanding of patient motivation and preferences for research participation and their interest in different types of research activities, particularly among those who are already represented in CDRNs. We surveyed a heart failure patient cohort constructed from EHRs in a CDRN to assess research participation. Results showed that CDRN recruitment is feasible. Respondents were most interested in completing a one-time survey and giving a blood sample one time. They were least interested in a study about weight control that require surgery. We found statistically significant associations between race and research activity interests.

Introduction/objectivesThe engagement of patients and other stakeholders is a critical element in the design of patient-centered outcomes research studies. However, methodology for scalable engagement in research management particularly activities such as operationalization of principles and setting of priorities is not well-developed. The objective of this study is to describe a novel approach for scalable stakeholder engagement in research aligned with the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) engagement principles, which was evaluated in a national clinical data research network.Materials and methodsPatient, patient advocate, clinician, and researcher stakeholders were recruited from clinical sites, as well as social media sites related to the 3 conditions of focus, heart failure, obesity, and Kawasaki disease. The engagement strategy was designed, implemented, and mapped to the PCORI engagement principles. Evaluation included internal assessment and quantitative measures of online engagement.ResultsWe operationalized the PCORI principles with 12 stakeholder engagement strategies and convened stakeholder advisory boards and online research prioritization panels to determine research priorities in a rigorous, deliberative process. A total of 46 advisors (20 patients) and 339 panelists (159 patients) actively participated. There were not significant differences between patients and clinicians in level of online engagement. Nonetheless, while patients reported a slightly greater challenge with following online discussion, they overall had a more favorable opinion about use of the online format.Discussion/conclusionAn efficient way to engage large numbers of representative stakeholders in research is a necessary first step to assure the public of trustworthy use of data networks for health research. This paper describes a comprehensive approach to engagement in patient-centered outcomes research management that informs ongoing development of rigorous methodologies in this area.