Methods to Facilitate the Capture, Use, and Reuse of Structured and Unstructured Clinical Data.

Electronic health records (EHRs) have great potential to improve quality of care and to support clinical and translational research. While EHRs are being increasingly implemented in U.S. hospitals and clinics, their anticipated benefits have been largely unachieved or underachieved. Among many factors, tedious documentation requirements and the lack of effective information retrieval tools to access and reuse data are two key reasons accounting for this deficiency. In this dissertation, I describe my research on developing novel methods to facilitate the capture, use, and reuse of both structured and unstructured clinical data. Specifically, I develop a framework to investigate potential issues in this research topic, with a focus on three significant challenges. The first challenge is structured data entry (SDE), which can be facilitated by four effective strategies based on my systematic review. I further propose a multi-strategy model to guide the development of future SDE applications. In the follow-up study, I focus on workflow integration and evaluate the feasibility of using EHR audit trail logs for clinical workflow analysis. The second challenge is the use of clinical narratives, which can be supported by my innovative information retrieval (IR) technique called “semantically-based query recommendation (SBQR)”. My user experiment shows that SBQR can help improve the perceived performance of a medical IR system, and may work better on search tasks with average difficulty. The third challenge involves reusing EHR data as a reference standard to benchmark the quality of other health-related information. My study assesses the readability of trial descriptions on ClinicalTrials.gov and found that trial descriptions are very hard to read, even harder than clinical notes. My dissertation has several contributions. First, it conducts pioneer studies with innovative methods to improve the capture, use, and reuse of clinical data. Second, my dissertation provides successful examples for investigators who would like to conduct interdisciplinary research in the field of health informatics. Third, the framework of my research can be a great tool to generate future research agenda in clinical documentation and EHRs. I will continue exploring innovative and effective methods to maximize the value of EHRs.PHDInformationUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studieshttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/135845/1/tzuyu_1.pd

Assessing the Readability of Medical Documents: A Ranking Approach

BACKGROUND: The use of electronic health record (EHR) systems with patient engagement capabilities, including viewing, downloading, and transmitting health information, has recently grown tremendously. However, using these resources to engage patients in managing their own health remains challenging due to the complex and technical nature of the EHR narratives. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to develop a machine learning-based system to assess readability levels of complex documents such as EHR notes. METHODS: We collected difficulty ratings of EHR notes and Wikipedia articles using crowdsourcing from 90 readers. We built a supervised model to assess readability based on relative orders of text difficulty using both surface text features and word embeddings. We evaluated system performance using the Kendall coefficient of concordance against human ratings. RESULTS: Our system achieved significantly higher concordance (.734) with human annotators than did a baseline using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, a widely adopted readability formula (.531). The improvement was also consistent across different disease topics. This method\u27s concordance with an individual human user\u27s ratings was also higher than the concordance between different human annotators (.658). CONCLUSIONS: We explored methods to automatically assess the readability levels of clinical narratives. Our ranking-based system using simple textual features and easy-to-learn word embeddings outperformed a widely used readability formula. Our ranking-based method can predict relative difficulties of medical documents. It is not constrained to a predefined set of readability levels, a common design in many machine learning-based systems. Furthermore, the feature set does not rely on complex processing of the documents. One potential application of our readability ranking is personalization, allowing patients to better accommodate their own background knowledge

From a literature review to a conceptual framework for health sector websites’ assessment

Health sector institutions’ websites need to act as effective web resources of information and interactive communication mediums to address the versatile demands of their multiple stakeholders. Academic and practitioner interest in health sector website assessment has considerably risen in recent years. This can be seen by the number of papers published in journals. The purpose of this paper is twofold to further establish the field. First, it offers a literature re-view on hospitals’ websites assessment. Second, it offers a conceptual framework to address the website assessment issue in health sector. The proposed assessment framework focuses on four main criteria: content, technology, services, and participation being evaluated by the use of several indicators. Academics, hospital practitioners, public officials and users will find the review and the framework useful, as they outline major lines of research in the field and a method to assess health institution websites.This paper is a result of the project “SmartEGOV: Harnessing EGOV for Smart Governance (Foundations, methods, Tools) / NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000037”, supported by Norte Portugal Regional Operational Programme (NORTE 2020), under the PORTUGAL 2020 Partnership Agreement, through the European Regional Development Fund (EFDR).info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Development and validation of the DIabetes Severity SCOre (DISSCO) in 139 626 individuals with type 2 diabetes: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE: Clinically applicable diabetes severity measures are lacking, with no previous studies comparing their predictive value with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). We developed and validated a type 2 diabetes severity score (the DIabetes Severity SCOre, DISSCO) and evaluated its association with risks of hospitalization and mortality, assessing its additional risk information to sociodemographic factors and HbA1c. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We used UK primary and secondary care data for 139 626 individuals with type 2 diabetes between 2007 and 2017, aged ≥35 years, and registered in general practices in England. The study cohort was randomly divided into a training cohort (n=111 748, 80%) to develop the severity tool and a validation cohort (n=27 878). We developed baseline and longitudinal severity scores using 34 diabetes-related domains. Cox regression models (adjusted for age, gender, ethnicity, deprivation, and HbA1c) were used for primary (all-cause mortality) and secondary (hospitalization due to any cause, diabetes, hypoglycemia, or cardiovascular disease or procedures) outcomes. Likelihood ratio (LR) tests were fitted to assess the significance of adding DISSCO to the sociodemographics and HbA1c models. RESULTS: A total of 139 626 patients registered in 400 general practices, aged 63±12 years were included, 45% of whom were women, 83% were White, and 18% were from deprived areas. The mean baseline severity score was 1.3±2.0. Overall, 27 362 (20%) people died and 99 951 (72%) had ≥1 hospitalization. In the training cohort, a one-unit increase in baseline DISSCO was associated with higher hazard of mortality (HR: 1.14, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.15, area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC)=0.76) and cardiovascular hospitalization (HR: 1.45, 95% CI 1.43 to 1.46, AUROC=0.73). The LR tests showed that adding DISSCO to sociodemographic variables significantly improved the predictive value of survival models, outperforming the added value of HbA1c for all outcomes. Findings were consistent in the validation cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Higher levels of DISSCO are associated with higher risks for hospital admissions and mortality. The new severity score had higher predictive value than the proxy used in clinical practice, HbA1c. This reproducible algorithm can help practitioners stratify clinical care of patients with type 2 diabetes