Developing Metadata Categories as a Strategy to Mobilize Computable Biomedical Knowledge

A work by a group of volunteer members drawn from the Mobilizing Computable Biomedical Knowledge community's Standards Workgroup. See mobilizecbk.org for more information about this community and workgroup.Computable biomedical knowledge artifacts (CBKs) are digital objects or entities representing biomedical knowledge as machine-independent data structures that can be parsed and processed by different information systems. The breadth of content represented in CBKs spans all biomedical knowledge related to human health and so it includes knowledge about molecules, cells, organs, individual people, human populations, and the environment. CBKs vary in their scope, purpose, and audience. Some CBKs support biomedical research. Other CBKs help improve health outcomes by enabling clinical decision support, health education, health promotion, and population health analytics. In some instances, CBKs have multiple uses that span research, education, clinical care, or population health. As the number of CBKs grows large, producers must describe them with structured, searchable metadata so that consumers can find, deploy, and use them properly. This report delineates categories of metadata for describing CBKs sufficiently to enable CBKs to be mobilized for various purposes.https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/155655/1/MCBK.Metadata.Paper.June2020.f.pdfDescription of MCBK.Metadata.Paper.June2020.f.pdf : MCBK 2020 Virtual Meeting version of Standards Workgroup's Working Paper on CBK Metadat

Using Timeline Displays to Improve Medication Reconciliation

Abstract --Objective: To explore approaches for integrating and visualizing time-oriented medication data in narrative and structured formats and to address related issues on handling temporal abstraction, granularity, and uncertainty. The ultimate goal is to improve medication reconciliation by providing clinicians with more accurate medication information in patient care. Methods: An event taxonomy was generated to capture different combinations of clinical and temporal uncertainties. A prototype of a temporal visualization system was implemented using an open source software package called Timeline. Medications were parsed and mapped to the event taxonomy, and then represented in Timelines. Seventy-five medications from narrative discharge summary reports and seventy-nine medications from structured orders were used as data input for temporal visualization. Five physicians served as domain experts and answered ten proof-of-concept survey questions. Results: Overall positive feedback from experts suggested the potential value of the proposed timeline visualization method. Challenges were also identified, and future work will include reconciliation of medications from various sources based on temporal attributes and medication classification

Categorizing metadata to help mobilize computable biomedical knowledge

IntroductionComputable biomedical knowledge artifacts (CBKs) are digital objects conveying biomedical knowledge in machine‐interpretable structures. As more CBKs are produced and their complexity increases, the value obtained from sharing CBKs grows. Mobilizing CBKs and sharing them widely can only be achieved if the CBKs are findable, accessible, interoperable, reusable, and trustable (FAIR+T). To help mobilize CBKs, we describe our efforts to outline metadata categories to make CBKs FAIR+T.MethodsWe examined the literature regarding metadata with the potential to make digital artifacts FAIR+T. We also examined metadata available online today for actual CBKs of 12 different types. With iterative refinement, we came to a consensus on key categories of metadata that, when taken together, can make CBKs FAIR+T. We use subject‐predicate‐object triples to more clearly differentiate metadata categories.ResultsWe defined 13 categories of CBK metadata most relevant to making CBKs FAIR+T. Eleven of these categories (type, domain, purpose, identification, location, CBK‐to‐CBK relationships, technical, authorization and rights management, provenance, evidential basis, and evidence from use metadata) are evident today where CBKs are stored online. Two additional categories (preservation and integrity metadata) were not evident in our examples. We provide a research agenda to guide further study and development of these and other metadata categories.ConclusionA wide variety of metadata elements in various categories is needed to make CBKs FAIR+T. More work is needed to develop a common framework for CBK metadata that can make CBKs FAIR+T for all stakeholders.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/171602/1/lrh210271.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/171602/2/lrh210271_am.pd

Synergies between centralized and federated approaches to data quality: a report from the national COVID cohort collaborative

Objective In response to COVID-19, the informatics community united to aggregate as much clinical data as possible to characterize this new disease and reduce its impact through collaborative analytics. The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) is now the largest publicly available HIPAA limited dataset in US history with over 6.4 million patients and is a testament to a partnership of over 100 organizations. Materials and Methods We developed a pipeline for ingesting, harmonizing, and centralizing data from 56 contributing data partners using 4 federated Common Data Models. N3C data quality (DQ) review involves both automated and manual procedures. In the process, several DQ heuristics were discovered in our centralized context, both within the pipeline and during downstream project-based analysis. Feedback to the sites led to many local and centralized DQ improvements. Results Beyond well-recognized DQ findings, we discovered 15 heuristics relating to source Common Data Model conformance, demographics, COVID tests, conditions, encounters, measurements, observations, coding completeness, and fitness for use. Of 56 sites, 37 sites (66%) demonstrated issues through these heuristics. These 37 sites demonstrated improvement after receiving feedback. Discussion We encountered site-to-site differences in DQ which would have been challenging to discover using federated checks alone. We have demonstrated that centralized DQ benchmarking reveals unique opportunities for DQ improvement that will support improved research analytics locally and in aggregate. Conclusion By combining rapid, continual assessment of DQ with a large volume of multisite data, it is possible to support more nuanced scientific questions with the scale and rigor that they require

Synergies between centralized and federated approaches to data quality: a report from the national COVID cohort collaborative

Objective In response to COVID-19, the informatics community united to aggregate as much clinical data as possible to characterize this new disease and reduce its impact through collaborative analytics. The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) is now the largest publicly available HIPAA limited dataset in US history with over 6.4 million patients and is a testament to a partnership of over 100 organizations. Materials and Methods We developed a pipeline for ingesting, harmonizing, and centralizing data from 56 contributing data partners using 4 federated Common Data Models. N3C data quality (DQ) review involves both automated and manual procedures. In the process, several DQ heuristics were discovered in our centralized context, both within the pipeline and during downstream project-based analysis. Feedback to the sites led to many local and centralized DQ improvements. Results Beyond well-recognized DQ findings, we discovered 15 heuristics relating to source Common Data Model conformance, demographics, COVID tests, conditions, encounters, measurements, observations, coding completeness, and fitness for use. Of 56 sites, 37 sites (66%) demonstrated issues through these heuristics. These 37 sites demonstrated improvement after receiving feedback. Discussion We encountered site-to-site differences in DQ which would have been challenging to discover using federated checks alone. We have demonstrated that centralized DQ benchmarking reveals unique opportunities for DQ improvement that will support improved research analytics locally and in aggregate. Conclusion By combining rapid, continual assessment of DQ with a large volume of multisite data, it is possible to support more nuanced scientific questions with the scale and rigor that they require