Accuracy of medical billing data against the electronic health record in the measurement of colorectal cancer screening rates.

ObjectiveMedical billing data are an attractive source of secondary analysis because of their ease of use and potential to answer population-health questions with statistical power. Although these datasets have known susceptibilities to biases, the degree to which they can distort the assessment of quality measures such as colorectal cancer screening rates are not widely appreciated, nor are their causes and possible solutions.MethodsUsing a billing code database derived from our institution's electronic health records, we estimated the colorectal cancer screening rate of average-risk patients aged 50-74 years seen in primary care or gastroenterology clinic in 2016-2017. 200 records (150 unscreened, 50 screened) were sampled to quantify the accuracy against manual review.ResultsOut of 4611 patients, an analysis of billing data suggested a 61% screening rate, an estimate that matches the estimate by the Centers for Disease Control. Manual review revealed a positive predictive value of 96% (86%-100%), negative predictive value of 21% (15%-29%) and a corrected screening rate of 85% (81%-90%). Most false negatives occurred due to examinations performed outside the scope of the database-both within and outside of our institution-but 21% of false negatives fell within the database's scope. False positives occurred due to incomplete examinations and inadequate bowel preparation. Reasons for screening failure include ordered but incomplete examinations (48%), lack of or incorrect documentation by primary care (29%) including incorrect screening intervals (13%) and patients declining screening (13%).ConclusionsBilling databases are prone to substantial bias that may go undetected even in the presence of confirmatory external estimates. Caution is recommended when performing population-level inference from these data. We propose several solutions to improve the use of these data for the assessment of healthcare quality

PatientExploreR: an extensible application for dynamic visualization of patient clinical history from electronic health records in the OMOP common data model.

MotivationElectronic health records (EHRs) are quickly becoming omnipresent in healthcare, but interoperability issues and technical demands limit their use for biomedical and clinical research. Interactive and flexible software that interfaces directly with EHR data structured around a common data model (CDM) could accelerate more EHR-based research by making the data more accessible to researchers who lack computational expertise and/or domain knowledge.ResultsWe present PatientExploreR, an extensible application built on the R/Shiny framework that interfaces with a relational database of EHR data in the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership CDM format. PatientExploreR produces patient-level interactive and dynamic reports and facilitates visualization of clinical data without any programming required. It allows researchers to easily construct and export patient cohorts from the EHR for analysis with other software. This application could enable easier exploration of patient-level data for physicians and researchers. PatientExploreR can incorporate EHR data from any institution that employs the CDM for users with approved access. The software code is free and open source under the MIT license, enabling institutions to install and users to expand and modify the application for their own purposes.Availability and implementationPatientExploreR can be freely obtained from GitHub: https://github.com/BenGlicksberg/PatientExploreR. We provide instructions for how researchers with approved access to their institutional EHR can use this package. We also release an open sandbox server of synthesized patient data for users without EHR access to explore: http://patientexplorer.ucsf.edu.Supplementary informationSupplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online

Opportunities and challenges in using real-world data for health care

Real-world data (RWD) continue to emerge as a new source of clinical evidence. Although the best-known use case of RWD has been in drug regulation, RWD are being generated and used by many other parties, including biopharmaceutical companies, payors, clinical researchers, providers, and patients. In this Review, we describe 21 potential uses for RWD across the spectrum of health care. We also discuss important challenges and limitations relevant to the translation of these data into evidence

Open data informatics and data repurposing for IBD

Biomedical ‘big data’ has opened opportunities for data repurposing to reveal new insights into complex diseases. Public data on IBD have been repurposed for novel diagnostics and therapeutics, and these datasets continue to grow. Here, we discuss the practicalities and implications of open data informatics for IBD

Sequential regression and simulation: a method for estimating causal effects from heterogeneous clinical trials without a common control group

BackgroundThe advent of clinical trial data sharing platforms has created opportunities for making new discoveries and answering important questions using already collected data. However, existing methods for meta-analyzing these data require the presence of shared control groups across studies, significantly limiting the number of questions that can be confidently addressed. We sought to develop a method for meta-analyzing potentially heterogeneous clinical trials even in the absence of a common control group.MethodsThis work was conducted within the context of a broader effort to study comparative efficacy in Crohn's disease. Following a search of clnicaltrials.gov we obtained access to the individual participant data from nine trials of FDA-approved treatments in Crohn's Disease (N = 3392). We developed a method involving sequences of regression and simulation to separately model the placebo- and drug-attributable effects, and to simulate head-to-head trials against an appropriately normalized background. We validated this method by comparing the outcome of a simulated trial comparing the efficacies of adalimumab and ustekinumab against the recently published results of SEAVUE, an actual head-to-head trial of these drugs. This study was pre-registered on PROSPERO (#157,827) prior to the completion of SEAVUE.ResultsUsing our method of sequential regression and simulation, we compared the week eight outcomes of two virtual cohorts subject to the same patient selection criteria as SEAVUE and treated with adalimumab or ustekinumab. Our primary analysis replicated the corresponding published results from SEAVUE (p = 0.9). This finding proved stable under multiple sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsThis new method may help reduce the bias of individual participant data meta-analyses, expand the scope of what can be learned from these already-collected data, and reduce the costs of obtaining high-quality evidence to guide patient care