1
|
Gierend K, Krüger F, Genehr S, Hartmann F, Siegel F, Waltemath D, Ganslandt T, Zeleke AA. Provenance Information for Biomedical Data and Workflows: Scoping Review. J Med Internet Res 2024; 26:e51297. [PMID: 39178413 PMCID: PMC11380065 DOI: 10.2196/51297] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2023] [Revised: 05/30/2024] [Accepted: 06/17/2024] [Indexed: 08/25/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The record of the origin and the history of data, known as provenance, holds importance. Provenance information leads to higher interpretability of scientific results and enables reliable collaboration and data sharing. However, the lack of comprehensive evidence on provenance approaches hinders the uptake of good scientific practice in clinical research. OBJECTIVE This scoping review aims to identify approaches and criteria for provenance tracking in the biomedical domain. We reviewed the state-of-the-art frameworks, associated artifacts, and methodologies for provenance tracking. METHODS This scoping review followed the methodological framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley. We searched the PubMed and Web of Science databases for English-language articles published from 2006 to 2022. Title and abstract screening were carried out by 4 independent reviewers using the Rayyan screening tool. A majority vote was required for consent on the eligibility of papers based on the defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Full-text reading and screening were performed independently by 2 reviewers, and information was extracted into a pretested template for the 5 research questions. Disagreements were resolved by a domain expert. The study protocol has previously been published. RESULTS The search resulted in a total of 764 papers. Of 624 identified, deduplicated papers, 66 (10.6%) studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. We identified diverse provenance-tracking approaches ranging from practical provenance processing and managing to theoretical frameworks distinguishing diverse concepts and details of data and metadata models, provenance components, and notations. A substantial majority investigated underlying requirements to varying extents and validation intensities but lacked completeness in provenance coverage. Mostly, cited requirements concerned the knowledge about data integrity and reproducibility. Moreover, these revolved around robust data quality assessments, consistent policies for sensitive data protection, improved user interfaces, and automated ontology development. We found that different stakeholder groups benefit from the availability of provenance information. Thereby, we recognized that the term provenance is subjected to an evolutionary and technical process with multifaceted meanings and roles. Challenges included organizational and technical issues linked to data annotation, provenance modeling, and performance, amplified by subsequent matters such as enhanced provenance information and quality principles. CONCLUSIONS As data volumes grow and computing power increases, the challenge of scaling provenance systems to handle data efficiently and assist complex queries intensifies, necessitating automated and scalable solutions. With rising legal and scientific demands, there is an urgent need for greater transparency in implementing provenance systems in research projects, despite the challenges of unresolved granularity and knowledge bottlenecks. We believe that our recommendations enable quality and guide the implementation of auditable and measurable provenance approaches as well as solutions in the daily tasks of biomedical scientists. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID) RR2-10.2196/31750.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin Gierend
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Mannheim Institute for intelligent Systems in Medicine, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Frank Krüger
- Faculty of Engineering, Wismar University of Applied Sciences, Wismar, Germany
- Institute of Communications Engineering, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| | - Sascha Genehr
- Institute of Communications Engineering, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| | - Francisca Hartmann
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Mannheim Institute for intelligent Systems in Medicine, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Fabian Siegel
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Mannheim Institute for intelligent Systems in Medicine, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Dagmar Waltemath
- Department of Medical Informatics, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany
| | - Thomas Ganslandt
- Chair of Medical Informatics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Boehm D, Strantz C, Christoph J, Busch H, Ganslandt T, Unberath P. Data Visualization Support for Tumor Boards and Clinical Oncology: Protocol for a Scoping Review. JMIR Res Protoc 2024; 13:e53627. [PMID: 38441925 PMCID: PMC10951826 DOI: 10.2196/53627] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2023] [Revised: 12/17/2023] [Accepted: 12/19/2023] [Indexed: 03/07/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Complex and expanding data sets in clinical oncology applications require flexible and interactive visualization of patient data to provide the maximum amount of information to physicians and other medical practitioners. Interdisciplinary tumor conferences in particular profit from customized tools to integrate, link, and visualize relevant data from all professions involved. OBJECTIVE The scoping review proposed in this protocol aims to identify and present currently available data visualization tools for tumor boards and related areas. The objective of the review will be to provide not only an overview of digital tools currently used in tumor board settings, but also the data included, the respective visualization solutions, and their integration into hospital processes. METHODS The planned scoping review process is based on the Arksey and O'Malley scoping study framework. The following electronic databases will be searched for articles published in English: PubMed, Web of Knowledge, and SCOPUS. Eligible articles will first undergo a deduplication step, followed by the screening of titles and abstracts. Second, a full-text screening will be used to reach the final decision about article selection. At least 2 reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts, and full-text reports. Conflicting inclusion decisions will be resolved by a third reviewer. The remaining literature will be analyzed using a data extraction template proposed in this protocol. The template includes a variety of meta information as well as specific questions aiming to answer the research question: "What are the key features of data visualization solutions used in molecular and organ tumor boards, and how are these elements integrated and used within the clinical setting?" The findings will be compiled, charted, and presented as specified in the scoping study framework. Data for included tools may be supplemented with additional manual literature searches. The entire review process will be documented in alignment with the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) flowchart. RESULTS The results of this scoping review will be reported per the expanded PRISMA-ScR guidelines. A preliminary search using PubMed, Web of Knowledge, and Scopus resulted in 1320 articles after deduplication that will be included in the further review process. We expect the results to be published during the second quarter of 2024. CONCLUSIONS Visualization is a key process in leveraging a data set's potentially available information and enabling its use in an interdisciplinary setting. The scoping review described in this protocol aims to present the status quo of visualization solutions for tumor board and clinical oncology applications and their integration into hospital processes. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/53627.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dominik Boehm
- Medical Center for Information and Communication Technology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (Bayerisches Zentrum für Krebsforschung), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Cosima Strantz
- Chair of Medical Informatics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Jan Christoph
- Chair of Medical Informatics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
- Junior Research Group (Bio-)medical Data Science, Faculty of Medicine, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany
| | - Hauke Busch
- Group for Medical Systems Biology, Lübeck Institute of Experimental Dermatology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Thomas Ganslandt
- Chair of Medical Informatics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Philipp Unberath
- Medical Center for Information and Communication Technology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
- SRH Fürth University of Applied Sciences, Fürth, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Zrubka Z, Kertész G, Gulácsi L, Czere J, Hölgyesi Á, Nezhad HM, Mosavi A, Kovács L, Butte AJ, Péntek M. The Reporting Quality of Machine Learning Studies on Pediatric Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review. J Med Internet Res 2024; 26:e47430. [PMID: 38241075 PMCID: PMC10837761 DOI: 10.2196/47430] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2023] [Revised: 04/29/2023] [Accepted: 11/17/2023] [Indexed: 01/23/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a major health concern among children with the widespread adoption of advanced technologies. However, concerns are growing about the transparency, replicability, biasedness, and overall validity of artificial intelligence studies in medicine. OBJECTIVE We aimed to systematically review the reporting quality of machine learning (ML) studies of pediatric DM using the Minimum Information About Clinical Artificial Intelligence Modelling (MI-CLAIM) checklist, a general reporting guideline for medical artificial intelligence studies. METHODS We searched the PubMed and Web of Science databases from 2016 to 2020. Studies were included if the use of ML was reported in children with DM aged 2 to 18 years, including studies on complications, screening studies, and in silico samples. In studies following the ML workflow of training, validation, and testing of results, reporting quality was assessed via MI-CLAIM by consensus judgments of independent reviewer pairs. Positive answers to the 17 binary items regarding sufficient reporting were qualitatively summarized and counted as a proxy measure of reporting quality. The synthesis of results included testing the association of reporting quality with publication and data type, participants (human or in silico), research goals, level of code sharing, and the scientific field of publication (medical or engineering), as well as with expert judgments of clinical impact and reproducibility. RESULTS After screening 1043 records, 28 studies were included. The sample size of the training cohort ranged from 5 to 561. Six studies featured only in silico patients. The reporting quality was low, with great variation among the 21 studies assessed using MI-CLAIM. The number of items with sufficient reporting ranged from 4 to 12 (mean 7.43, SD 2.62). The items on research questions and data characterization were reported adequately most often, whereas items on patient characteristics and model examination were reported adequately least often. The representativeness of the training and test cohorts to real-world settings and the adequacy of model performance evaluation were the most difficult to judge. Reporting quality improved over time (r=0.50; P=.02); it was higher than average in prognostic biomarker and risk factor studies (P=.04) and lower in noninvasive hypoglycemia detection studies (P=.006), higher in studies published in medical versus engineering journals (P=.004), and higher in studies sharing any code of the ML pipeline versus not sharing (P=.003). The association between expert judgments and MI-CLAIM ratings was not significant. CONCLUSIONS The reporting quality of ML studies in the pediatric population with DM was generally low. Important details for clinicians, such as patient characteristics; comparison with the state-of-the-art solution; and model examination for valid, unbiased, and robust results, were often the weak points of reporting. To assess their clinical utility, the reporting standards of ML studies must evolve, and algorithms for this challenging population must become more transparent and replicable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zsombor Zrubka
- HECON Health Economics Research Center, University Research and Innovation Center, Óbuda University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Gábor Kertész
- John von Neumann Faculty of Informatics, Óbuda University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - László Gulácsi
- HECON Health Economics Research Center, University Research and Innovation Center, Óbuda University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - János Czere
- Doctoral School of Innovation Management, Óbuda University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Áron Hölgyesi
- HECON Health Economics Research Center, University Research and Innovation Center, Óbuda University, Budapest, Hungary
- Doctoral School of Molecular Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Hossein Motahari Nezhad
- HECON Health Economics Research Center, University Research and Innovation Center, Óbuda University, Budapest, Hungary
- Doctoral School of Business and Management, Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Amir Mosavi
- John von Neumann Faculty of Informatics, Óbuda University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Levente Kovács
- Physiological Controls Research Center, University Research and Innovation Center, Óbuda University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Atul J Butte
- Bakar Computational Health Sciences Institute, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States
| | - Márta Péntek
- HECON Health Economics Research Center, University Research and Innovation Center, Óbuda University, Budapest, Hungary
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Gierend K, Freiesleben S, Kadioglu D, Siegel F, Ganslandt T, Waltemath D. The Status of Data Management Practices Across German Medical Data Integration Centers: Mixed Methods Study. J Med Internet Res 2023; 25:e48809. [PMID: 37938878 PMCID: PMC10666010 DOI: 10.2196/48809] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2023] [Revised: 09/09/2023] [Accepted: 09/29/2023] [Indexed: 11/10/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In the context of the Medical Informatics Initiative, medical data integration centers (DICs) have implemented complex data flows to transfer routine health care data into research data repositories for secondary use. Data management practices are of importance throughout these processes, and special attention should be given to provenance aspects. Insufficient knowledge can lead to validity risks and reduce the confidence and quality of the processed data. The need to implement maintainable data management practices is undisputed, but there is a great lack of clarity on the status. OBJECTIVE Our study examines the current data management practices throughout the data life cycle within the Medical Informatics in Research and Care in University Medicine (MIRACUM) consortium. We present a framework for the maturity status of data management practices and present recommendations to enable a trustful dissemination and reuse of routine health care data. METHODS In this mixed methods study, we conducted semistructured interviews with stakeholders from 10 DICs between July and September 2021. We used a self-designed questionnaire that we tailored to the MIRACUM DICs, to collect qualitative and quantitative data. Our study method is compliant with the Good Reporting of a Mixed Methods Study (GRAMMS) checklist. RESULTS Our study provides insights into the data management practices at the MIRACUM DICs. We identify several traceability issues that can be partially explained with a lack of contextual information within nonharmonized workflow steps, unclear responsibilities, missing or incomplete data elements, and incomplete information about the computational environment information. Based on the identified shortcomings, we suggest a data management maturity framework to reach more clarity and to help define enhanced data management strategies. CONCLUSIONS The data management maturity framework supports the production and dissemination of accurate and provenance-enriched data for secondary use. Our work serves as a catalyst for the derivation of an overarching data management strategy, abiding data integrity and provenance characteristics as key factors. We envision that this work will lead to the generation of fairer and maintained health research data of high quality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kerstin Gierend
- Department of Biomedical Informatics at the Center for Preventive Medicine and Digital Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Sherry Freiesleben
- Core Unit Data Integration Center and Medical Informatics Laboratory, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany
| | - Dennis Kadioglu
- Institute for Medical Informatics (IMI), Goethe University Frankfurt, University Hospital, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
- Department for Information and Communication Technology (DICT), Data Integration Center (DIC), Goethe University Frankfurt, University Hospital, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Fabian Siegel
- Department of Biomedical Informatics at the Center for Preventive Medicine and Digital Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Thomas Ganslandt
- Chair of Medical Informatics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Dagmar Waltemath
- Core Unit Data Integration Center and Medical Informatics Laboratory, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Kamdje Wabo G, Prasser F, Gierend K, Siegel F, Ganslandt T. Data Quality- and Utility-Compliant Anonymization of Common Data Model-Harmonized Electronic Health Record Data: Protocol for a Scoping Review. JMIR Res Protoc 2023; 12:e46471. [PMID: 37566443 PMCID: PMC10457704 DOI: 10.2196/46471] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2023] [Revised: 05/31/2023] [Accepted: 06/28/2023] [Indexed: 08/12/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The anonymization of Common Data Model (CDM)-converted EHR data is essential to ensure the data privacy in the use of harmonized health care data. However, applying data anonymization techniques can significantly affect many properties of the resulting data sets and thus biases research results. Few studies have reviewed these applications with a reflection of approaches to manage data utility and quality concerns in the context of CDM-formatted health care data. OBJECTIVE Our intended scoping review aims to identify and describe (1) how formal anonymization methods are carried out with CDM-converted health care data, (2) how data quality and utility concerns are considered, and (3) how the various CDMs differ in terms of their suitability for recording anonymized data. METHODS The planned scoping review is based on the framework of Arksey and O'Malley. By using this, only articles published in English will be included. The retrieval of literature items should be based on a literature search string combining keywords related to data anonymization, CDM standards, and data quality assessment. The proposed literature search query should be validated by a librarian, accompanied by manual searches to include further informal sources. Eligible articles will first undergo a deduplication step, followed by the screening of titles. Second, a full-text reading will allow the 2 reviewers involved to reach the final decision about article selection, while a domain expert will support the resolution of citation selection conflicts. Additionally, key information will be extracted, categorized, summarized, and analyzed by using a proposed template into an iterative process. Tabular and graphical analyses should be addressed in alignment with the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist. We also performed some tentative searches on Web of Science for estimating the feasibility of reaching eligible articles. RESULTS Tentative searches on Web of Science resulted in 507 nonduplicated matches, suggesting the availability of (potential) relevant articles. Further analysis and selection steps will allow us to derive a final literature set. Furthermore, the completion of this scoping review study is expected by the end of the fourth quarter of 2023. CONCLUSIONS Outlining the approaches of applying formal anonymization methods on CDM-formatted health care data while taking into account data quality and utility concerns should provide useful insights to understand the existing approaches and future research direction based on identified gaps. This protocol describes a schedule to perform a scoping review, which should support the conduction of follow-up investigations. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID) PRR1-10.2196/46471.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gaetan Kamdje Wabo
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Center for Preventive Medicine and Digital Health Baden-Württemberg, Mannheim Medical Faculty of the University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Fabian Prasser
- Berlin Institute of Health at Charité, Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Kerstin Gierend
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Center for Preventive Medicine and Digital Health Baden-Württemberg, Mannheim Medical Faculty of the University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Fabian Siegel
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Center for Preventive Medicine and Digital Health Baden-Württemberg, Mannheim Medical Faculty of the University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
- Department of Urology and Urosurgery, University Medical Center Mannheim, Mannheim Medical Faculty of the University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Thomas Ganslandt
- Chair of Medical Informatics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Wolfien M, Ahmadi N, Fitzer K, Grummt S, Heine KL, Jung IC, Krefting D, Kühn A, Peng Y, Reinecke I, Scheel J, Schmidt T, Schmücker P, Schüttler C, Waltemath D, Zoch M, Sedlmayr M. Ten Topics to Get Started in Medical Informatics Research. J Med Internet Res 2023; 25:e45948. [PMID: 37486754 PMCID: PMC10407648 DOI: 10.2196/45948] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/23/2023] [Revised: 03/29/2023] [Accepted: 04/11/2023] [Indexed: 07/25/2023] Open
Abstract
The vast and heterogeneous data being constantly generated in clinics can provide great wealth for patients and research alike. The quickly evolving field of medical informatics research has contributed numerous concepts, algorithms, and standards to facilitate this development. However, these difficult relationships, complex terminologies, and multiple implementations can present obstacles for people who want to get active in the field. With a particular focus on medical informatics research conducted in Germany, we present in our Viewpoint a set of 10 important topics to improve the overall interdisciplinary communication between different stakeholders (eg, physicians, computational experts, experimentalists, students, patient representatives). This may lower the barriers to entry and offer a starting point for collaborations at different levels. The suggested topics are briefly introduced, then general best practice guidance is given, and further resources for in-depth reading or hands-on tutorials are recommended. In addition, the topics are set to cover current aspects and open research gaps of the medical informatics domain, including data regulations and concepts; data harmonization and processing; and data evaluation, visualization, and dissemination. In addition, we give an example on how these topics can be integrated in a medical informatics curriculum for higher education. By recognizing these topics, readers will be able to (1) set clinical and research data into the context of medical informatics, understanding what is possible to achieve with data or how data should be handled in terms of data privacy and storage; (2) distinguish current interoperability standards and obtain first insights into the processes leading to effective data transfer and analysis; and (3) value the use of newly developed technical approaches to utilize the full potential of clinical data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Markus Wolfien
- Institute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
- Center for Scalable Data Analytics and Artificial Intelligence, Dresden, Germany
| | - Najia Ahmadi
- Institute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Kai Fitzer
- Core Unit Data Integration Center, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany
| | - Sophia Grummt
- Institute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Kilian-Ludwig Heine
- Institute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Ian-C Jung
- Institute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Dagmar Krefting
- Department of Medical Informatics, University Medical Center, Goettingen, Germany
| | - Andreas Kühn
- Institute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Yuan Peng
- Institute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Ines Reinecke
- Institute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Julia Scheel
- Department of Systems Biology and Bioinformatics, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| | - Tobias Schmidt
- Institute for Medical Informatics, University of Applied Sciences Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Paul Schmücker
- Institute for Medical Informatics, University of Applied Sciences Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Christina Schüttler
- Central Biobank Erlangen, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Dagmar Waltemath
- Core Unit Data Integration Center, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany
- Department of Medical Informatics, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany
| | - Michele Zoch
- Institute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Martin Sedlmayr
- Institute for Medical Informatics and Biometry, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
- Center for Scalable Data Analytics and Artificial Intelligence, Dresden, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Johns M, Meurers T, Wirth FN, Haber AC, Müller A, Halilovic M, Balzer F, Prasser F. Data Provenance in Biomedical Research: Scoping Review. J Med Internet Res 2023; 25:e42289. [PMID: 36972116 PMCID: PMC10132013 DOI: 10.2196/42289] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2022] [Revised: 12/14/2022] [Accepted: 12/23/2022] [Indexed: 03/29/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Data provenance refers to the origin, processing, and movement of data. Reliable and precise knowledge about data provenance has great potential to improve reproducibility as well as quality in biomedical research and, therefore, to foster good scientific practice. However, despite the increasing interest on data provenance technologies in the literature and their implementation in other disciplines, these technologies have not yet been widely adopted in biomedical research. OBJECTIVE The aim of this scoping review was to provide a structured overview of the body of knowledge on provenance methods in biomedical research by systematizing articles covering data provenance technologies developed for or used in this application area; describing and comparing the functionalities as well as the design of the provenance technologies used; and identifying gaps in the literature, which could provide opportunities for future research on technologies that could receive more widespread adoption. METHODS Following a methodological framework for scoping studies and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines, articles were identified by searching the PubMed, IEEE Xplore, and Web of Science databases and subsequently screened for eligibility. We included original articles covering software-based provenance management for scientific research published between 2010 and 2021. A set of data items was defined along the following five axes: publication metadata, application scope, provenance aspects covered, data representation, and functionalities. The data items were extracted from the articles, stored in a charting spreadsheet, and summarized in tables and figures. RESULTS We identified 44 original articles published between 2010 and 2021. We found that the solutions described were heterogeneous along all axes. We also identified relationships among motivations for the use of provenance information, feature sets (capture, storage, retrieval, visualization, and analysis), and implementation details such as the data models and technologies used. The important gap that we identified is that only a few publications address the analysis of provenance data or use established provenance standards, such as PROV. CONCLUSIONS The heterogeneity of provenance methods, models, and implementations found in the literature points to the lack of a unified understanding of provenance concepts for biomedical data. Providing a common framework, a biomedical reference, and benchmarking data sets could foster the development of more comprehensive provenance solutions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marco Johns
- Medical Informatics Group, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Thierry Meurers
- Medical Informatics Group, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Felix N Wirth
- Medical Informatics Group, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Anna C Haber
- Medical Informatics Group, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Armin Müller
- Medical Informatics Group, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Mehmed Halilovic
- Medical Informatics Group, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Felix Balzer
- Institute of Medical Informatics, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Fabian Prasser
- Medical Informatics Group, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|