Literature DB >> 23531748

Validation of electronic medical record-based phenotyping algorithms: results and lessons learned from the eMERGE network.

Katherine M Newton1, Peggy L Peissig, Abel Ngo Kho, Suzette J Bielinski, Richard L Berg, Vidhu Choudhary, Melissa Basford, Christopher G Chute, Iftikhar J Kullo, Rongling Li, Jennifer A Pacheco, Luke V Rasmussen, Leslie Spangler, Joshua C Denny.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Genetic studies require precise phenotype definitions, but electronic medical record (EMR) phenotype data are recorded inconsistently and in a variety of formats.
OBJECTIVE: To present lessons learned about validation of EMR-based phenotypes from the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) studies.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The eMERGE network created and validated 13 EMR-derived phenotype algorithms. Network sites are Group Health, Marshfield Clinic, Mayo Clinic, Northwestern University, and Vanderbilt University.
RESULTS: By validating EMR-derived phenotypes we learned that: (1) multisite validation improves phenotype algorithm accuracy; (2) targets for validation should be carefully considered and defined; (3) specifying time frames for review of variables eases validation time and improves accuracy; (4) using repeated measures requires defining the relevant time period and specifying the most meaningful value to be studied; (5) patient movement in and out of the health plan (transience) can result in incomplete or fragmented data; (6) the review scope should be defined carefully; (7) particular care is required in combining EMR and research data; (8) medication data can be assessed using claims, medications dispensed, or medications prescribed; (9) algorithm development and validation work best as an iterative process; and (10) validation by content experts or structured chart review can provide accurate results.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite the diverse structure of the five EMRs of the eMERGE sites, we developed, validated, and successfully deployed 13 electronic phenotype algorithms. Validation is a worthwhile process that not only measures phenotype performance but also strengthens phenotype algorithm definitions and enhances their inter-institutional sharing.

Entities:  

Keywords:  electronic health record; electronic medical record; genomics; phenotype; validation studies

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23531748      PMCID: PMC3715338          DOI: 10.1136/amiajnl-2012-000896

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc        ISSN: 1067-5027            Impact factor:   4.497


  20 in total

Review 1.  Definition of the phenotype.

Authors:  J P Rice; N L Saccone; E Rasmussen
Journal:  Adv Genet       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 1.944

2.  Electronic medical records and health care transformation.

Authors:  James M Walker
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2005 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 6.301

Review 3.  Definition of phenotype.

Authors:  Mary K Wojczynski; Hemant K Tiwari
Journal:  Adv Genet       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 1.944

4.  Identification of genomic predictors of atrioventricular conduction: using electronic medical records as a tool for genome science.

Authors:  Joshua C Denny; Marylyn D Ritchie; Dana C Crawford; Jonathan S Schildcrout; Andrea H Ramirez; Jill M Pulley; Melissa A Basford; Daniel R Masys; Jonathan L Haines; Dan M Roden
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2010-11-01       Impact factor: 29.690

5.  Leveraging informatics for genetic studies: use of the electronic medical record to enable a genome-wide association study of peripheral arterial disease.

Authors:  Iftikhar J Kullo; Jin Fan; Jyotishman Pathak; Guergana K Savova; Zeenat Ali; Christopher G Chute
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2010 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 4.497

6.  Building a virtual cancer research organization.

Authors:  Mark C Hornbrook; Gene Hart; Jennifer L Ellis; Donald J Bachman; Gary Ansell; Sarah M Greene; Edward H Wagner; Roy Pardee; Mark M Schmidt; Ann Geiger; Amy L Butani; Terry Field; Hassan Fouayzi; Irina Miroshnik; Liyan Liu; Robert Diseker; Karen Wells; Rick Krajenta; Lois Lamerato; Christine Neslund Dudas
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2005

7.  The eMERGE Network: a consortium of biorepositories linked to electronic medical records data for conducting genomic studies.

Authors:  Catherine A McCarty; Rex L Chisholm; Christopher G Chute; Iftikhar J Kullo; Gail P Jarvik; Eric B Larson; Rongling Li; Daniel R Masys; Marylyn D Ritchie; Dan M Roden; Jeffery P Struewing; Wendy A Wolf
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2011-01-26       Impact factor: 3.063

8.  A genome-wide association study of red blood cell traits using the electronic medical record.

Authors:  Iftikhar J Kullo; Keyue Ding; Hayan Jouni; Carin Y Smith; Christopher G Chute
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-09-28       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Size matters: just how big is BIG?: Quantifying realistic sample size requirements for human genome epidemiology.

Authors:  Paul R Burton; Anna L Hansell; Isabel Fortier; Teri A Manolio; Muin J Khoury; Julian Little; Paul Elliott
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2008-08-01       Impact factor: 7.196

10.  Power and sample size calculations in the presence of phenotype errors for case/control genetic association studies.

Authors:  Brian J Edwards; Chad Haynes; Mark A Levenstien; Stephen J Finch; Derek Gordon
Journal:  BMC Genet       Date:  2005-04-08       Impact factor: 2.797

View more
  187 in total

1.  Combining billing codes, clinical notes, and medications from electronic health records provides superior phenotyping performance.

Authors:  Wei-Qi Wei; Pedro L Teixeira; Huan Mo; Robert M Cronin; Jeremy L Warner; Joshua C Denny
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2015-09-02       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Clinical Research Informatics: Recent Advances and Future Directions.

Authors:  M Dugas
Journal:  Yearb Med Inform       Date:  2015-08-13

3.  Trends in biomedical informatics: automated topic analysis of JAMIA articles.

Authors:  Dong Han; Shuang Wang; Chao Jiang; Xiaoqian Jiang; Hyeon-Eui Kim; Jimeng Sun; Lucila Ohno-Machado
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.497

4.  Development and Validation of an Algorithm to Identify Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in the Electronic Medical Record.

Authors:  Kathleen E Corey; Uri Kartoun; Hui Zheng; Stanley Y Shaw
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 3.199

5.  A multi-site cognitive task analysis for biomedical query mediation.

Authors:  Gregory W Hruby; Luke V Rasmussen; David Hanauer; Vimla L Patel; James J Cimino; Chunhua Weng
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2016-06-16       Impact factor: 4.046

6.  Performing an Informatics Consult: Methods and Challenges.

Authors:  Alejandro Schuler; Alison Callahan; Kenneth Jung; Nigam H Shah
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2018-02-13       Impact factor: 5.532

7.  Making work visible for electronic phenotype implementation: Lessons learned from the eMERGE network.

Authors:  Ning Shang; Cong Liu; Luke V Rasmussen; Casey N Ta; Robert J Caroll; Barbara Benoit; Todd Lingren; Ozan Dikilitas; Frank D Mentch; David S Carrell; Wei-Qi Wei; Yuan Luo; Vivian S Gainer; Iftikhar J Kullo; Jennifer A Pacheco; Hakon Hakonarson; Theresa L Walunas; Joshua C Denny; Ken Wiley; Shawn N Murphy; George Hripcsak; Chunhua Weng
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2019-09-19       Impact factor: 6.317

8.  Sleep health, diseases, and pain syndromes: findings from an electronic health record biobank.

Authors:  Hassan S Dashti; Brian E Cade; Gerda Stutaite; Richa Saxena; Susan Redline; Elizabeth W Karlson
Journal:  Sleep       Date:  2021-03-12       Impact factor: 5.849

Review 9.  A new era of quality measurement in rheumatology: electronic clinical quality measures and national registries.

Authors:  Chris Tonner; Gabriela Schmajuk; Jinoos Yazdany
Journal:  Curr Opin Rheumatol       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 5.006

10.  Automated identification of an aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease cohort.

Authors:  Katherine N Cahill; Christina B Johns; Jing Cui; Paige Wickner; David W Bates; Tanya M Laidlaw; Patrick E Beeler
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 10.793

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.