10 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
The Monarch Initiative: an integrative data and analytic platform connecting phenotypes to genotypes across species.
The correlation of phenotypic outcomes with genetic variation and environmental factors is a core pursuit in biology and biomedicine. Numerous challenges impede our progress: patient phenotypes may not match known diseases, candidate variants may be in genes that have not been characterized, model organisms may not recapitulate human or veterinary diseases, filling evolutionary gaps is difficult, and many resources must be queried to find potentially significant genotype-phenotype associations. Non-human organisms have proven instrumental in revealing biological mechanisms. Advanced informatics tools can identify phenotypically relevant disease models in research and diagnostic contexts. Large-scale integration of model organism and clinical research data can provide a breadth of knowledge not available from individual sources and can provide contextualization of data back to these sources. The Monarch Initiative (monarchinitiative.org) is a collaborative, open science effort that aims to semantically integrate genotype-phenotype data from many species and sources in order to support precision medicine, disease modeling, and mechanistic exploration. Our integrated knowledge graph, analytic tools, and web services enable diverse users to explore relationships between phenotypes and genotypes across species
The Monarch Initiative: an integrative data and analytic platform connecting phenotypes to genotypes across species
The correlation of phenotypic outcomes with genetic variation and environmental factors is a core pursuit in biology and biomedicine. Numerous challenges impede our progress: patient phenotypes may not match known diseases, candidate variants may be in genes that have not been characterized, model organisms may not recapitulate human or veterinary diseases, filling evolutionary gaps is difficult, and many resources must be queried to find potentially significant genotype–phenotype associations. Non-human organisms have proven instrumental in revealing biological mechanisms. Advanced informatics tools can identify phenotypically relevant disease models in research and diagnostic contexts. Large-scale integration of model organism and clinical research data can provide a breadth of knowledge not available from individual sources and can provide contextualization of data back to these sources. The Monarch Initiative (monarchinitiative.org) is a collaborative, open science effort that aims to semantically integrate genotype–phenotype data from many species and sources in order to support precision medicine, disease modeling, and mechanistic exploration. Our integrated knowledge graph, analytic tools, and web services enable diverse users to explore relationships between phenotypes and genotypes across species
Bedside Back to Bench: Building Bridges between Basic and Clinical Genomic Research.
Genome sequencing has revolutionized the diagnosis of genetic diseases. Close collaborations between basic scientists and clinical genomicists are now needed to link genetic variants with disease causation. To facilitate such collaborations, we recommend prioritizing clinically relevant genes for functional studies, developing reference variant-phenotype databases, adopting phenotype description standards, and promoting data sharing.
Cell 2017 Mar 23; 169(1):6-12
The Monarch Initiative: an integrative data and analytic platform connecting phenotypes to genotypes across species
Global Foreign Investment Insurance The Case of MIGA with Comparisons to OPIC and Private Insurance
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
Nonelective coronary artery bypass graft outcomes are adversely impacted by Coronavirus disease 2019 infection, but not altered processes of care: A National COVID Cohort Collaborative and National Surgery Quality Improvement Program analysisCentral MessagePerspective
Objective: The effects of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and altered processes of care on nonelective coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) outcomes remain unknown. We hypothesized that patients with COVID-19 infection would have longer hospital lengths of stay and greater mortality compared with COVID-negative patients, but that these outcomes would not differ between COVID-negative and pre-COVID controls. Methods: The National COVID Cohort Collaborative 2020-2022 was queried for adult patients undergoing CABG. Patients were divided into COVID-negative, COVID-active, and COVID-convalescent groups. Pre-COVID control patients were drawn from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Adjusted analysis of the 3 COVID groups was performed via generalized linear models. Results: A total of 17,293 patients underwent nonelective CABG, including 16,252 COVID-negative, 127 COVID-active, 367 COVID-convalescent, and 2254 pre-COVID patients. Compared to pre-COVID patients, COVID-negative patients had no difference in mortality, whereas COVID-active patients experienced increased mortality. Mortality and pneumonia were higher in COVID-active patients compared to COVID-negative and COVID-convalescent patients. Adjusted analysis demonstrated that COVID-active patients had higher in-hospital mortality, 30- and 90-day mortality, and pneumonia compared to COVID-negative patients. COVID-convalescent patients had a shorter length of stay but a higher rate of renal impairment. Conclusions: Traditional care processes were altered during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our data show that nonelective CABG in patients with active COVID-19 is associated with significantly increased rates of mortality and pneumonia. The equivalent mortality in COVID-negative and pre-COVID patients suggests that pandemic-associated changes in processes of care did not impact CABG outcomes. Additional research into optimal timing of CABG after COVID infection is warranted