Why digital medicine depends on interoperability

Digital data are anticipated to transform medicine. However, most of today's medical data lack interoperability: hidden in isolated databases, incompatible systems and proprietary software, the data are difficult to exchange, analyze, and interpret. This slows down medical progress, as technologies that rely on these data - artificial intelligence, big data or mobile applications - cannot be used to their full potential. In this article, we argue that interoperability is a prerequisite for the digital innovations envisioned for future medicine. We focus on four areas where interoperable data and IT systems are particularly important: (1) artificial intelligence and big data; (2) medical communication; (3) research; and (4) international cooperation. We discuss how interoperability can facilitate digital transformation in these areas to improve the health and well-being of patients worldwide

Learning signals of adverse drug-drug interactions from the unstructured text of electronic health records.

Drug-drug interactions (DDI) account for 30% of all adverse drug reactions, which are the fourth leading cause of death in the US. Current methods for post marketing surveillance primarily use spontaneous reporting systems for learning DDI signals and validate their signals using the structured portions of Electronic Health Records (EHRs). We demonstrate a fast, annotation-based approach, which uses standard odds ratios for identifying signals of DDIs from the textual portion of EHRs directly and which, to our knowledge, is the first effort of its kind. We developed a gold standard of 1,120 DDIs spanning 14 adverse events and 1,164 drugs. Our evaluations on this gold standard using millions of clinical notes from the Stanford Hospital confirm that identifying DDI signals from clinical text is feasible (AUROC=81.5%). We conclude that the text in EHRs contain valuable information for learning DDI signals and has enormous utility in drug surveillance and clinical decision support

Predictive modeling of housing instability and homelessness in the Veterans Health Administration

OBJECTIVE: To develop and test predictive models of housing instability and homelessness based on responses to a brief screening instrument administered throughout the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Electronic medical record data from 5.8 million Veterans who responded to the VHA's Homelessness Screening Clinical Reminder (HSCR) between October 2012 and September 2015. STUDY DESIGN: We randomly selected 80% of Veterans in our sample to develop predictive models. We evaluated the performance of both logistic regression and random forests—a machine learning algorithm—using the remaining 20% of cases. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Data were extracted from two sources: VHA's Corporate Data Warehouse and National Homeless Registry. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Performance for all models was acceptable or better. Random forests models were more sensitive in predicting housing instability and homelessness than logistic regression, but less specific in predicting housing instability. Rates of positive screens for both outcomes were highest among Veterans in the top strata of model‐predicted risk. CONCLUSIONS: Predictive models based on medical record data can identify Veterans likely to report housing instability and homelessness, making the HSCR screening process more efficient and informing new engagement strategies. Our findings have implications for similar instruments in other health care systems.U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Services Research and Development (HSR&D), Grant/Award Number: IIR 13-334 (IIR 13-334 - U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Services Research and Development (HSRD))Accepted manuscrip

Privacy and Accountability in Black-Box Medicine

Black-box medicine—the use of big data and sophisticated machine learning techniques for health-care applications—could be the future of personalized medicine. Black-box medicine promises to make it easier to diagnose rare diseases and conditions, identify the most promising treatments, and allocate scarce resources among different patients. But to succeed, it must overcome two separate, but related, problems: patient privacy and algorithmic accountability. Privacy is a problem because researchers need access to huge amounts of patient health information to generate useful medical predictions. And accountability is a problem because black-box algorithms must be verified by outsiders to ensure they are accurate and unbiased, but this means giving outsiders access to this health information. This article examines the tension between the twin goals of privacy and accountability and develops a framework for balancing that tension. It proposes three pillars for an effective system of privacy-preserving accountability: substantive limitations on the collection, use, and disclosure of patient information; independent gatekeepers regulating information sharing between those developing and verifying black-box algorithms; and information-security requirements to prevent unintentional disclosures of patient information. The article examines and draws on a similar debate in the field of clinical trials, where disclosing information from past trials can lead to new treatments but also threatens patient privacy