Patient Cohort Identification on Time Series Data Using the OMOP Common Data Model

Pregnancy Outcomes among Pregnant Persons after COVID-19 Vaccination: Assessing Vaccine Safety in Retrospective Cohort Analysis of U.S. National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C)

COVID-19 vaccines have been shown to be effective in preventing severe illness, including among pregnant persons. The vaccines appear to be safe in pregnancy, supporting a continuously favorable overall risk/benefit profile, though supportive data for the U.S. over different periods of variant predominance are lacking. We sought to analyze the association of adverse pregnancy outcomes with COVID-19 vaccinations in the pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants' dominant periods (constituting 50% or more of each pregnancy) for pregnant persons in a large, nationally sampled electronic health record repository in the U.S. Our overall analysis included 311,057 pregnant persons from December 2020 to October 2023 at a time when there were approximately 3.6 million births per year. We compared rates of preterm births and stillbirths among pregnant persons who were vaccinated before or during pregnancy to persons vaccinated after pregnancy or those who were not vaccinated. We performed a multivariable Poisson regression with generalized estimated equations to address data site heterogeneity for preterm births and unadjusted exact models for stillbirths, stratified by the dominant variant period. We found lower rates of preterm birth in the majority of modeled periods (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] range: 0.42 to 0.85; p-value range: <0.001 to 0.06) and lower rates of stillbirth (IRR range: 0.53 to 1.82; p-value range: <0.001 to 0.976) in most periods among those who were vaccinated before or during pregnancy compared to those who were vaccinated after pregnancy or not vaccinated. We largely found no adverse associations between COVID-19 vaccination and preterm birth or stillbirth; these findings reinforce the safety of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy and bolster confidence for pregnant persons, providers, and policymakers in the importance of COVID-19 vaccination for this group despite the end of the public health emergency.

COVID-19 outcomes in persons with hemophilia: results from a US-based national COVID-19 surveillance registry

BACKGROUND

Hypercoagulable state contributing to thrombotic complications worsens COVID-19 severity and outcomes, whereas anticoagulation improves outcomes by alleviating hypercoagulability.

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether hemophilia, an inherent hypocoagulable condition, offers protection against COVID-19 severity and reduces venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk in persons with hemophilia (PwH).

METHODS

A 1:3 propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study used national COVID-19 registry data (January 2020 through January 2022) to compare outcomes between 300 male PwH and 900 matched controls without hemophilia.

RESULTS

Analyses of PwH demonstrated that known risk factors (older age, heart failure, hypertension, cancer/malignancy, dementia, and renal and liver disease) contributed to severe COVID-19 and/or 30-day all-cause mortality. Non-central nervous system bleeding was an additional risk factor for poor outcomes in PwH. Odds of developing VTE with COVID-19 in PwH were associated with pre-COVID VTE diagnosis (odds ratio [OR], 51.9; 95% CI, 12.8-266; p < .001), anticoagulation therapy (OR, 12.7; 95% CI, 3.01-48.6; p < .001), and pulmonary disease (OR, 16.1; 95% CI, 10.4-25.4; p < .001). Thirty-day all-cause mortality (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.75-2.11; p = .3) and VTE events (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.64-2.73; p = .4) were not significantly different between the matched cohorts; however, hospitalizations (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.20-2.10; p = .001) and non-central nervous system bleeding events (OR, 4.78; 95% CI, 2.98-7.48; p < .001) were increased in PwH. In multivariate analyses, hemophilia did not reduce adverse outcomes (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.74-2.31; p = .2) or VTE (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.44-2.67; p = .8) but increased bleeding risk (OR, 4.70; 95% CI, 2.98-7.48; p < .001).

CONCLUSION

After adjusting for patient characteristics/comorbidities, hemophilia increased bleeding risk with COVID-19 but did not protect against severe disease and VTE.

Operational Ontology for Oncology (O3): A Professional Society-Based, Multistakeholder, Consensus-Driven Informatics Standard Supporting Clinical and Research Use of Real-World Data From Patients Treated for Cancer

PURPOSE

The ongoing lack of data standardization severely undermines the potential for automated learning from the vast amount of information routinely archived in electronic health records (EHRs), radiation oncology information systems, treatment planning systems, and other cancer care and outcomes databases. We sought to create a standardized ontology for clinical data, social determinants of health, and other radiation oncology concepts and interrelationships.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine's Big Data Science Committee was initiated in July 2019 to explore common ground from the stakeholders' collective experience of issues that typically compromise the formation of large inter- and intra-institutional databases from EHRs. The Big Data Science Committee adopted an iterative, cyclical approach to engaging stakeholders beyond its membership to optimize the integration of diverse perspectives from the community.

RESULTS

We developed the Operational Ontology for Oncology (O3), which identified 42 key elements, 359 attributes, 144 value sets, and 155 relationships ranked in relative importance of clinical significance, likelihood of availability in EHRs, and the ability to modify routine clinical processes to permit aggregation. Recommendations are provided for best use and development of the O3 to 4 constituencies: device manufacturers, centers of clinical care, researchers, and professional societies.

CONCLUSIONS

O3 is designed to extend and interoperate with existing global infrastructure and data science standards. The implementation of these recommendations will lower the barriers for aggregation of information that could be used to create large, representative, findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable data sets to support the scientific objectives of grant programs. The construction of comprehensive "real-world" data sets and application of advanced analytical techniques, including artificial intelligence, holds the potential to revolutionize patient management and improve outcomes by leveraging increased access to information derived from larger, more representative data sets.

Review of Visualization Approaches in Deep Learning Models of Glaucoma

Glaucoma is a major cause of irreversible blindness worldwide. As glaucoma often presents without symptoms, early detection and intervention are important in delaying progression. Deep learning (DL) has emerged as a rapidly advancing tool to help achieve these objectives. In this narrative review, data types and visualization approaches for presenting model predictions, including models based on tabular data, functional data, and/or structural data, are summarized, and the importance of data source diversity for improving the utility and generalizability of DL models is explored. Examples of innovative approaches to understanding predictions of artificial intelligence (AI) models and alignment with clinicians are provided. In addition, methods to enhance the interpretability of clinical features from tabular data used to train AI models are investigated. Examples of published DL models that include interfaces to facilitate end-user engagement and minimize cognitive and time burdens are highlighted. The stages of integrating AI models into existing clinical workflows are reviewed, and challenges are discussed. Reviewing these approaches may help inform the generation of user-friendly interfaces that are successfully integrated into clinical information systems. This review details key principles regarding visualization approaches in DL models of glaucoma. The articles reviewed here focused on usability, explainability, and promotion of clinician trust to encourage wider adoption for clinical use. These studies demonstrate important progress in addressing visualization and explainability issues required for successful real-world implementation of DL models in glaucoma.

A Standardized Clinical Data Harmonization Pipeline for Scalable AI Application Deployment (FHIR-DHP): Validation and Usability Study

BACKGROUND

Increasing digitalization in the medical domain gives rise to large amounts of health care data, which has the potential to expand clinical knowledge and transform patient care if leveraged through artificial intelligence (AI). Yet, big data and AI oftentimes cannot unlock their full potential at scale, owing to nonstandardized data formats, lack of technical and semantic data interoperability, and limited cooperation between stakeholders in the health care system. Despite the existence of standardized data formats for the medical domain, such as Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR), their prevalence and usability for AI remain limited.

OBJECTIVE

In this paper, we developed a data harmonization pipeline (DHP) for clinical data sets relying on the common FHIR data standard.

METHODS

We validated the performance and usability of our FHIR-DHP with data from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV database.

RESULTS

We present the FHIR-DHP workflow in respect of the transformation of "raw" hospital records into a harmonized, AI-friendly data representation. The pipeline consists of the following 5 key preprocessing steps: querying of data from hospital database, FHIR mapping, syntactic validation, transfer of harmonized data into the patient-model database, and export of data in an AI-friendly format for further medical applications. A detailed example of FHIR-DHP execution was presented for clinical diagnoses records.

CONCLUSIONS

Our approach enables the scalable and needs-driven data modeling of large and heterogenous clinical data sets. The FHIR-DHP is a pivotal step toward increasing cooperation, interoperability, and quality of patient care in the clinical routine and for medical research.

Metformin is associated with reduced COVID-19 severity in patients with prediabetes

AIMS

Studies suggest that metformin is associated with reduced COVID-19 severity in individuals with diabetes compared to other antihyperglycemics. We assessed if metformin is associated with reduced incidence of severe COVID-19 for patients with prediabetes or polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), common diseases that increase the risk of severe COVID-19.

METHODS

This observational, retrospective study utilized EHR data from 52 hospitals for COVID-19 patients with PCOS or prediabetes treated with metformin or levothyroxine/ondansetron (controls). After balancing via inverse probability score weighting, associations with COVID-19 severity were assessed by logistic regression.

RESULTS

In the prediabetes cohort, when compared to levothyroxine, metformin was associated with a significantly lower incidence of COVID-19 with "mild-ED" or worse (OR [95% CI]: 0.636, [0.455-0.888]) and "moderate" or worse severity (0.493 [0.339-0.718]). Compared to ondansetron, metformin was associated with lower incidence of "mild-ED" or worse severity (0.039 [0.026-0.057]), "moderate" or worse (0.045 [0.03-0.069]), "severe" or worse (0.183 [0.077-0.431]), and "mortality/hospice" (0.223 [0.071-0.694]). For PCOS, metformin showed no significant differences in severity compared to levothyroxine, but was associated with a significantly lower incidence of "mild-ED" or worse (0.101 [0.061-0.166]), and "moderate" or worse (0.094 [0.049-0.18]) COVID-19 outcome compared to ondansetron.

CONCLUSIONS

Metformin use is associated with less severe COVID-19 in patients with prediabetes or PCOS.

Data Sources for Evaluating Health Disparities in Ophthalmology: Where We Are and Where We Need to Go

Data provide an opportunity to discover disparities and inequities that may otherwise be unrecognized. Within the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) Task Force on Disparities in Eye Care, the Leveraging Data Sub-task Force was charged with identifying data sources to study health disparities in eye care and to leverage data to advance health equity. We evaluated large data sources to determine their strengths, deficiencies, and relative accessibility in relation to the likelihood of identifying eye care disparities. We highlight the current challenges with these data sources and review key recommendations for improving future sources for studying health disparities in eye care.

Metformin is Associated with Reduced COVID-19 Severity in Patients with Prediabetes

Background

With the continuing COVID-19 pandemic, identifying medications that improve COVID-19 outcomes is crucial. Studies suggest that use of metformin, an oral antihyperglycemic, is associated with reduced COVID-19 severity in individuals with diabetes compared to other antihyperglycemic medications. Some patients without diabetes, including those with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) and prediabetes, are prescribed metformin for off-label use, which provides an opportunity to further investigate the effect of metformin on COVID-19.

Participants

In this observational, retrospective analysis, we leveraged the harmonized electronic health record data from 53 hospitals to construct cohorts of COVID-19 positive, metformin users without diabetes and propensity-weighted control users of levothyroxine (a medication for hypothyroidism that is not known to affect COVID-19 outcome) who had either PCOS (n = 282) or prediabetes (n = 3136). The primary outcome of interest was COVID-19 severity, which was classified as: mild, mild ED (emergency department), moderate, severe, or mortality/hospice.

Results

In the prediabetes cohort, metformin use was associated with a lower rate of COVID-19 with severity of mild ED or worse (OR: 0.630, 95% CI 0.450 - 0.882, p < 0.05) and a lower rate of COVID-19 with severity of moderate or worse (OR: 0.490, 95% CI 0.336 - 0.715, p < 0.001). In patients with PCOS, we found no significant association between metformin use and COVID-19 severity, although the number of patients was relatively small.

Conclusions

Metformin was associated with less severe COVID-19 in patients with prediabetes, as seen in previous studies of patients with diabetes. This is an important finding, since prediabetes affects between 19 and 38% of the US population, and COVID-19 is an ongoing public health emergency. Further observational and prospective studies will clarify the relationship between metformin and COVID-19 severity in patients with prediabetes, and whether metformin usage may reduce COVID-19 severity.

Design and validation of a FHIR-based EHR-driven phenotyping toolbox

OBJECTIVES

To develop and validate a standards-based phenotyping tool to author electronic health record (EHR)-based phenotype definitions and demonstrate execution of the definitions against heterogeneous clinical research data platforms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We developed an open-source, standards-compliant phenotyping tool known as the PhEMA Workbench that enables a phenotype representation using the Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) and Clinical Quality Language (CQL) standards. We then demonstrated how this tool can be used to conduct EHR-based phenotyping, including phenotype authoring, execution, and validation. We validated the performance of the tool by executing a thrombotic event phenotype definition at 3 sites, Mayo Clinic (MC), Northwestern Medicine (NM), and Weill Cornell Medicine (WCM), and used manual review to determine precision and recall.

RESULTS

An initial version of the PhEMA Workbench has been released, which supports phenotype authoring, execution, and publishing to a shared phenotype definition repository. The resulting thrombotic event phenotype definition consisted of 11 CQL statements, and 24 value sets containing a total of 834 codes. Technical validation showed satisfactory performance (both NM and MC had 100% precision and recall and WCM had a precision of 95% and a recall of 84%).

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate that the PhEMA Workbench can facilitate EHR-driven phenotype definition, execution, and phenotype sharing in heterogeneous clinical research data environments. A phenotype definition that integrates with existing standards-compliant systems, and the use of a formal representation facilitates automation and can decrease potential for human error.

NSAID use and clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients: a 38-center retrospective cohort study

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.

NSAID use and clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients: A 38-center retrospective cohort study

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 COVID-19 inpatients was constructed by matching cases (treated with NSAIDs) and controls (not treated) from 857,061 patients with COVID-19. 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 findings are the largest EHR-based analysis of the effect of NSAIDs on outcome in COVID-19 patients to date. 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.

Generation of a Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR)-based Ontology for federated Feasibility Queries in the context of COVID-19: An automated approach (Preprint)

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the importance of making research data from all German hospitals available to scientists to respond to current and future pandemics promptly. The heterogeneous data originating from proprietary systems at hospitals' sites must be harmonized and accessible. The German Corona Consensus Dataset (GECCO) specifies how data for COVID-19 patients will be standardized in Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) profiles across German hospitals. However, given the complexity of the FHIR standard, the data harmonization is not sufficient to make the data accessible. A simplified visual representation is needed to reduce the technical burden, while allowing feasibility queries.

Objective

This study investigates how a search ontology can be automatically generated using FHIR profiles and a terminology server. Furthermore, it describes how this ontology can be used in a user interface (UI) and how a mapping and a terminology tree created together with the ontology can translate user input into FHIR queries.

Methods

We used the FHIR profiles from the GECCO data set combined with a terminology server to generate an ontology and the required mapping files for the translation. We analyzed the profiles and identified search criteria for the visual representation. In this process, we reduced the complex profiles to code value pairs for improved usability. We enriched our ontology with the necessary information to display it in a UI. We also developed an intermediate query language to transform the queries from the UI to federated FHIR requests. Separation of concerns resulted in discrepancies between the criteria used in the intermediate query format and the target query language. Therefore, a mapping was created to reintroduce all information relevant for creating the query in its target language. Further, we generated a tree representation of the ontology hierarchy, which allows resolving child concepts in the process.

Results

In the scope of this project, 82 (99%) of 83 elements defined in the GECCO profile were successfully implemented. We verified our solution based on an independently developed test patient. A discrepancy between the test data and the criteria was found in 6 cases due to different versions used to generate the test data and the UI profiles, the support for specific code systems, and the evaluation of postcoordinated Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine (SNOMED) codes. Our results highlight the need for governance mechanisms for version changes, concept mapping between values from different code systems encoding the same concept, and support for different unit dimensions.

Conclusions

We developed an automatic process to generate ontology and mapping files for FHIR-formatted data. Our tests found that this process works for most of our chosen FHIR profile criteria. The process established here works directly with FHIR profiles and a terminology server, making it extendable to other FHIR profiles and demonstrating that automatic ontology generation on FHIR profiles is feasible.

Gaps in standards for integrating artificial intelligence technologies into ophthalmic practice

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of healthcare standards and their relevance to multiple ophthalmic workflows, with a specific emphasis on describing gaps in standards development needed for improved integration of artificial intelligence technologies into ophthalmic practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Healthcare standards are an essential component of data exchange and critical for clinical practice, research, and public health surveillance activities. Standards enable interoperability between clinical information systems, healthcare information exchange between institutions, and clinical decision support in a complex health information technology ecosystem. There are several gaps in standards in ophthalmology, including relatively low adoption of imaging standards, lack of use cases for integrating apps providing artificial intelligence -based decision support, lack of common data models to harmonize big data repositories, and no standards regarding interfaces and algorithmic outputs.

SUMMARY

These gaps in standards represent opportunities for future work to develop improved data flow between various elements of the digital health ecosystem. This will enable more widespread adoption and integration of artificial intelligence-based tools into clinical practice. Engagement and support from the ophthalmology community for standards development will be important for advancing this work.