BACKGROUND: Comparative effectiveness research, medical product safety evaluation, and quality measurement will require the ability to use electronic health data held by multiple organizations. There is no consensus about whether to create regional or national combined (eg, "all payer") databases for these purposes, or distributed data networks that leave most Protected Health Information and proprietary data in the possession of the original data holders. OBJECTIVES: Demonstrate functions of a distributed research network that supports research needs and also address data holders concerns about participation. Key design functions included strong local control of data uses and a centralized web-based querying interface. RESEARCH DESIGN: We implemented a pilot distributed research network and evaluated the design considerations, utility for research, and the acceptability to data holders of methods for menu-driven querying. We developed and tested a central, web-based interface with supporting network software. Specific functions assessed include query formation and distribution, query execution and review, and aggregation of results. RESULTS: This pilot successfully evaluated temporal trends in medication use and diagnoses at 5 separate sites, demonstrating some of the possibilities of using a distributed research network. The pilot demonstrated the potential utility of the design, which addressed the major concerns of both users and data holders. No serious obstacles were identified that would prevent development of a fully functional, scalable network. CONCLUSIONS: Distributed networks are capable of addressing nearly all anticipated uses of routinely collected electronic healthcare data. Distributed networks would obviate the need for centralized databases, thus avoiding numerous obstacles.
BACKGROUND: Comparative effectiveness research, medical product safety evaluation, and quality measurement will require the ability to use electronic health data held by multiple organizations. There is no consensus about whether to create regional or national combined (eg, "all payer") databases for these purposes, or distributed data networks that leave most Protected Health Information and proprietary data in the possession of the original data holders. OBJECTIVES: Demonstrate functions of a distributed research network that supports research needs and also address data holders concerns about participation. Key design functions included strong local control of data uses and a centralized web-based querying interface. RESEARCH DESIGN: We implemented a pilot distributed research network and evaluated the design considerations, utility for research, and the acceptability to data holders of methods for menu-driven querying. We developed and tested a central, web-based interface with supporting network software. Specific functions assessed include query formation and distribution, query execution and review, and aggregation of results. RESULTS: This pilot successfully evaluated temporal trends in medication use and diagnoses at 5 separate sites, demonstrating some of the possibilities of using a distributed research network. The pilot demonstrated the potential utility of the design, which addressed the major concerns of both users and data holders. No serious obstacles were identified that would prevent development of a fully functional, scalable network. CONCLUSIONS: Distributed networks are capable of addressing nearly all anticipated uses of routinely collected electronic healthcare data. Distributed networks would obviate the need for centralized databases, thus avoiding numerous obstacles.
Authors: Tracy A Lieu; David Au; Jerry A Krishnan; Marc Moss; Harry Selker; Andrea Harabin; Virginia Taggart; Alfred Connors Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2011-10-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Michael Klompas; Jason McVetta; Ross Lazarus; Emma Eggleston; Gillian Haney; Benjamin A Kruskal; W Katherine Yih; Patricia Daly; Paul Oppedisano; Brianne Beagan; Michael Lee; Chaim Kirby; Dawn Heisey-Grove; Alfred DeMaria; Richard Platt Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Susan E Andrade; Robert L Davis; T Craig Cheetham; William O Cooper; De-Kun Li; Thushi Amini; Sarah J Beaton; Sascha Dublin; Tarek A Hammad; Pamala A Pawloski; Marsha A Raebel; David H Smith; Judy A Staffa; Sengwee Toh; Inna Dashevsky; Katherine Haffenreffer; Kimberly Lane; Richard Platt; Pamela E Scott Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2012-10
Authors: Katherine K Kim; Dennis K Browe; Holly C Logan; Roberta Holm; Lori Hack; Lucila Ohno-Machado Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2013-12-03 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Art Sedrakyan; Stephen Graves; Barbara Bordini; Miquel Pons; Leif Havelin; Susan Mehle; Elizabeth Paxton; Thomas Barber; Guy Cafri Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2014-12-17 Impact factor: 5.284