• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

使用电子健康记录数据进行临床效果研究的挑战:4 个学习型组织的经验及应用的解决方案。

Challenges in using electronic health record data for CER: experience of 4 learning organizations and solutions applied.

机构信息

Center for Outcomes Research and Education, Providence Health & Services, Portland, OR 97213, USA.

出版信息

Med Care. 2013 Aug;51(8 Suppl 3):S80-6. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31829b1d48.

DOI:10.1097/MLR.0b013e31829b1d48
PMID:23774512
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To document the strengths and challenges of using electronic health records (EHRs) for comparative effectiveness research (CER).

METHODS

A replicated case study of comparative effectiveness in hypertension treatment was conducted across 4 health systems, with instructions to extract data and document problems encountered using a specified list of required data elements. Researchers at each health system documented successes and challenges, and suggested solutions for addressing challenges.

RESULTS

Data challenges fell into 5 categories: missing data, erroneous data, uninterpretable data, inconsistencies among providers and over time, and data stored in noncoded text notes. Suggested strategies to address these issues include data validation steps, use of surrogate markers, natural language processing, and statistical techniques.

DISCUSSION

A number of EHR issues can hamper the extraction of valid data for cross-health system comparative effectiveness studies. Our case example cautions against a blind reliance on EHR data as a single definitive data source. Nevertheless, EHR data are superior to administrative or claims data alone, and are cheaper and timelier than clinical trials or manual chart reviews. All 4 participating health systems are pursuing pathways to more effectively use EHR data for CER.A partnership between clinicians, researchers, and information technology specialists is encouraged as a way to capitalize on the wealth of information contained in the EHR. Future developments in both technology and care delivery hold promise for improvement in the ability to use EHR data for CER.

摘要

目的

记录使用电子健康记录(EHR)进行比较疗效研究(CER)的优势和挑战。

方法

在 4 个医疗系统中进行了高血压治疗比较疗效的复制案例研究,并要求使用指定的必需数据元素列表提取数据并记录遇到的问题。每个医疗系统的研究人员记录了成功和挑战,并提出了解决挑战的建议。

结果

数据挑战分为 5 类:缺失数据、错误数据、无法解释的数据、提供者之间和随时间的不一致,以及存储在非编码文本注释中的数据。解决这些问题的建议策略包括数据验证步骤、使用替代标记物、自然语言处理和统计技术。

讨论

许多 EHR 问题可能会阻碍跨医疗系统进行比较疗效研究时有效数据的提取。我们的案例警告不要盲目依赖 EHR 数据作为单一的确定数据源。尽管如此,EHR 数据优于行政或索赔数据,并且比临床试验或手动图表审查更便宜、更及时。所有 4 个参与的医疗系统都在寻求更有效地将 EHR 数据用于 CER 的途径。鼓励临床医生、研究人员和信息技术专家之间建立合作伙伴关系,以利用 EHR 中包含的丰富信息。技术和医疗服务提供方面的未来发展有望提高使用 EHR 数据进行 CER 的能力。

相似文献

1
Challenges in using electronic health record data for CER: experience of 4 learning organizations and solutions applied.使用电子健康记录数据进行临床效果研究的挑战:4 个学习型组织的经验及应用的解决方案。
Med Care. 2013 Aug;51(8 Suppl 3):S80-6. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31829b1d48.
2
CER Hub: An informatics platform for conducting comparative effectiveness research using multi-institutional, heterogeneous, electronic clinical data.CER中心:一个利用多机构、异构电子临床数据进行比较效果研究的信息学平台。
Int J Med Inform. 2015 Oct;84(10):763-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2015.06.002. Epub 2015 Jun 10.
3
Importance of health information technology, electronic health records, and continuously aggregating data to comparative effectiveness research and learning health care.重视健康信息技术、电子健康记录以及不断积累数据,以进行比较效果研究和学习医疗保健。
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Dec 1;30(34):4243-8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.42.8011. Epub 2012 Oct 15.
4
It is important to note that RWD will never replace the more traditional and more robust RCT data; however, the emerging trend is to incorporate data that are more generalizable. Introduction.需要注意的是,真实世界数据(RWD)永远无法取代更为传统且更为可靠的随机对照试验(RCT)数据;然而,新出现的趋势是纳入更具普遍性的数据。引言。
J Manag Care Pharm. 2011 Nov-Dec;17(9 Suppl A):S03-4.
5
Comparative Effectiveness Research Through a Collaborative Electronic Reporting Consortium.通过协作电子报告联盟开展的比较效果研究。
Pediatrics. 2015 Jul;136(1):e215-24. doi: 10.1542/peds.2015-0673. Epub 2015 Jun 22.
6
Data quality assessment for comparative effectiveness research in distributed data networks.分布式数据网络中比较有效性研究的数据质量评估。
Med Care. 2013 Aug;51(8 Suppl 3):S22-9. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31829b1e2c.
7
Electronic health record use to classify patients with newly diagnosed versus preexisting type 2 diabetes: infrastructure for comparative effectiveness research and population health management.电子健康记录用于对新诊断与既有 2 型糖尿病患者进行分类:比较效果研究和人群健康管理的基础设施。
Popul Health Manag. 2012 Feb;15(1):3-11. doi: 10.1089/pop.2010.0084. Epub 2011 Aug 30.
8
The Electronic Data Methods (EDM) forum for comparative effectiveness research (CER).电子数据方法(EDM)论坛用于比较效果研究(CER)。
Med Care. 2012 Jul;50 Suppl:S7-10. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318257a66b.
9
Caveats for the use of operational electronic health record data in comparative effectiveness research.使用操作性电子健康记录数据进行比较有效性研究的注意事项。
Med Care. 2013 Aug;51(8 Suppl 3):S30-7. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31829b1dbd.
10
The comparative effectiveness of 2 electronic prescribing systems.两种电子处方系统的比较效果。
Am J Manag Care. 2011 Dec;17(12 Spec No.):SP88-94.

引用本文的文献

1
Cholecystitis Treatment and Outcomes Among People Living With Dementia.痴呆症患者的胆囊炎治疗与结局
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2025 Jul;73(7):2088-2096. doi: 10.1111/jgs.19487. Epub 2025 Apr 22.
2
Sharing data matters: exploring the attitudes of older consumers on an emerging healthy ageing data platform using electronic health records for research.数据共享至关重要:利用电子健康记录进行研究,探索老年消费者对新兴健康老龄化数据平台的态度。
BMJ Health Care Inform. 2025 Jan 2;32(1):e101126. doi: 10.1136/bmjhci-2024-101126.
3
Clinical characteristics and favorable treatment responses of recurrent focal segmental glomerulosclerosis or steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome in children after kidney transplantation.
儿童肾移植后复发性局灶节段性肾小球硬化或激素抵抗性肾病综合征的临床特征及治疗反应良好。
Pediatr Nephrol. 2024 Nov;39(11):3317-3331. doi: 10.1007/s00467-024-06452-z. Epub 2024 Jul 13.
4
Hip Fracture Treatment and Outcomes Among Community-Dwelling People Living With Dementia.社区居住的痴呆症患者的髋部骨折治疗和结局。
JAMA Netw Open. 2024 May 1;7(5):e2413878. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.13878.
5
Accessing and utilizing clinical and genomic data from an electronic health record data warehouse.从电子健康记录数据仓库中获取和利用临床及基因组数据。
Transl Med Commun. 2023;8. doi: 10.1186/s41231-023-00140-0. Epub 2023 Mar 2.
6
Leveraging informative missing data to learn about acute respiratory distress syndrome and mortality in long-term hospitalized COVID-19 patients throughout the years of the pandemic.利用有信息价值的缺失数据了解大流行期间长期住院的 COVID-19 患者的急性呼吸窘迫综合征和死亡率。
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2024 Jan 11;2023:942-950. eCollection 2023.
7
Leveraging informative missing data to learn about acute respiratory distress syndrome and mortality in long-term hospitalized COVID-19 patients throughout the years of the pandemic.在新冠疫情的数年中,利用信息性缺失数据了解长期住院的新冠患者的急性呼吸窘迫综合征和死亡率。
medRxiv. 2023 Dec 19:2023.12.18.23300181. doi: 10.1101/2023.12.18.23300181.
8
Exploring phenotype-based ventilator parameter optimization to mitigate postoperative pulmonary complications: a retrospective observational cohort study.基于表型的呼吸机参数优化以减轻术后肺部并发症的研究:一项回顾性观察性队列研究。
Surg Today. 2024 Jul;54(7):722-733. doi: 10.1007/s00595-023-02785-8. Epub 2023 Dec 14.
9
Scalable and interpretable alternative to chart review for phenotype evaluation using standardized structured data from electronic health records.利用电子健康记录中的标准化结构化数据进行表型评估的可扩展且可解释的图表审查替代方法。
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2023 Dec 22;31(1):119-129. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocad202.
10
Handling Missing Data in Health Economics and Outcomes Research (HEOR): A Systematic Review and Practical Recommendations.处理健康经济学和结果研究(HEOR)中的缺失数据:系统评价和实用建议。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2023 Dec;41(12):1589-1601. doi: 10.1007/s40273-023-01297-0. Epub 2023 Jul 25.