Electronic health records: New opportunities for clinical research

Journal of Internal Medicine

Volumn 274, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 547-560

  Coorevits, P ^a,b   Sundgren, M ^c   Klein, G O ^d   Bahr, A ^e   Claerhout, B ^f   Daniel, C ^g   Dugas, M ^h   Dupont, D ⁱ   Schmidt, A ^j   Singleton, P ^k   De Moor, G ^a,b   Kalra, D ^l  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^b European Institute for Health Records (EuroRec)   (Belgium)

^c ASTRAZENECA R AND D   (Sweden)

^d NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

^e SANOFI   (France)

^f Custodix NV ^*  (Belgium)

^g UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DESCARTES   (France)

^h UNIVERSITY OF MÜNSTER   (Germany)

ⁱ DATA MINING INTERNATIONAL   (Switzerland)

^j F HOFFMANN LA ROCHE LTD   (Switzerland)

^k Cambridge Technology Centre   (United Kingdom)

^l UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

more..

Author keywords

Clinical research; Electronic health records; Research ethics; Research techniques

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL RESEARCH; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; DATA BASE; DRUG INDUSTRY; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; GENOME; HUMAN; MANAGEMENT; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; PATIENT CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESEARCH ETHICS; REVIEW; STUDY DESIGN; WORKFLOW;

CLINICAL RESEARCH; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS; RESEARCH ETHICS; RESEARCH TECHNIQUES;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS; HUMANS; RESEARCH DESIGN; SYSTEMS INTEGRATION;

EID: 84887401594     PISSN: 09546820     EISSN: 13652796     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/joim.12119     Document Type: Review

References (99)

1. 'Towards 2020 Science' report. Available from: http://research.microsoft.com/towards2020science. 2006.
2. Beck T, Gollapudi S, Brunak S et al. Knowledge engineering for health: a new discipline required to bridge the "ICT gap" between research and healthcare. Hum Mutat 2012; 33: 797-802.
3. Kairos Future. The Data Explosion and the Future of Health: What every decision-maker in the health and healthcare industries need to know about the coming revolution. Global Strategic Analysis Report. 2011.
4. Geissbuhler A, Safran C, Buchan I et al. Trustworthy reuse of health data: a transnational perspective. Int J Med Informatics 2013; 82: 1-9.
5. Jensen PB, Jensen LJ, Brunak S. Mining electronic health records: towards better research applications and clinical care. Nat Rev Genet 2012; 13: 395-405.
6. Electronic Health Record Systems for Clinical Research (EHR4CR). Available from: http://www.ehr4cr.eu.
7. Desroches CM, Audet AM, Painter M, Donelan K. Meeting meaningful use criteria and managing patient populations: a national survey of practicing physicians. Ann Intern Med 2013; 158: 791-9.
8. Hayrinen K, Saranto K, Nykanen P. Definition, structure, content, use and impacts of electronic health records: a review of the research literature. Int J Med Informatics 2008; 77: 291-304.
9. Weiskopf NG, Weng C. Methods and dimensions of electronic health record data quality assessment: enabling reuse for clinical research. JAMIA 2013; 20: 144-51.
10. De Moor G, O'Brien J, Fridsma D et al. Policy brief on the current status of certification of electronic Health Records in the US and Europe. Stud Health Technol Inform 2011; 170: 83-106.
11. Hoerbst A, Ammenwerth E. Electronic health records. A systematic review on quality requirements. Methods Inf Med 2010; 49: 320-36.
12. Hoerbst A, Ammenwerth E. Quality and Certification of Electronic Health Records: an overview of current approaches from the US and Europe. Appl Clin Inform 2010; 1: 149-64.
13. International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) Guideline for Good Clinical Practice (GCP), 2002.
14. McCormack JL, Ash JS. Clinician perspectives on the quality of patient data used for clinical decision support: a qualitative study. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2012; 2012: 1302-9.
15. Porter SC, Mandl KD. Data quality and the electronic medical record: a role for direct parental data entry. Proc AMIA Symp 1999: 354-8.
16. Fritz F, Balhorn S, Riek M, Breil B, Dugas M. Qualitative and quantitative evaluation of EHR-integrated mobile patient questionnaires regarding usability and cost-efficiency. Int J Med Informatics 2012; 81: 303-13.
17. Black AD, Car J, Pagliari C et al. The impact of eHealth on the quality and safety of health care: a systematic overview. PLoS Med 2011; 8: e1000387.
18. Weng C, Appelbaum P, Hripcsak G et al. Using EHRs to integrate research with patient care: promises and challenges. JAMIA 2012; 19: 684-7.
19. Botsis T, Hartvigsen G, Chen F, Weng C. Secondary use of EHR: data quality issues and informatics opportunities. AMIA Summits Transl Sci Proc 2010; 2010: 1-5.
20. Kopcke F, Trinczek B, Majeed RW et al. Evaluation of data completeness in the electronic health record for the purpose of patient recruitment into clinical trials: a retrospective analysis of element presence. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2013; 13: 37.
21. Kahn MG, Raebel MA, Glanz JM, Riedlinger K, Steiner JF. A pragmatic framework for single-site and multisite data quality assessment in electronic health record-based clinical research. Med Care 2012; 50(Suppl): S21-9.
22. Ovretveit J, Keller C, Hvitfeldt Forsberg H, Essen A, Lindblad S, Brommels M. Continuous innovation: developing and using a clinical database with new technology for patient-centred care-the case of the Swedish quality register for arthritis. Int J Qual Health Care 2013; 25: 118-24.
23. Stroetman VKD, Rector A, Rodrigues J-M, Stroetman K, Surjan G et al. Semantic Interoperability for Better Health and Safer Healthcare. 2009.
24. EN ISO 13606-1:2012, Health informatics - Electronic health record communication - Part 1 - Reference model, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva 2008 and CEN - The European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, 2012.
25. Kalra D, Beale T, Heard S. The openEHR Foundation. Stud Health Technol Inform 2005; 115: 153-73.
26. Dolin RH, Alschuler L, Boyer S et al. HL7 clinical document architecture, release 2. JAMIA 2006; 13: 30-9.
27. Bointner K, Duftschmid G. HL7 template model and EN/ISO 13606 archetype object model - a comparison. Stud Health Technol Inform 2009; 150: 249.
28. Kalra D, Musen M, Smith B, Ceusters W, De Moor G. ARGOS policy brief on semantic interoperability. Stud Health Technol Inform 2011; 170: 1-15.
29. Goossen W. Representing knowledge, data and concepts for EHRS using DCM. Stud Health Technol Inform 2011; 169: 774-8.
30. Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC) Study Design Model in XML (SDM-XML). Available from: http://www.cdisc.org/stuff/contentmgr/files/0/8c85b168e80d6834ded59339b55fdbc7/misc/cdisc_sdm_xml_1.0.pdf.
31. Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC) Protocol Representation Model (PRM). Available from: http://www.cdisc.org/protocol.
32. Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC) Operational Data Model (ODM). Available from: http://www.cdisc.org/odm.
33. Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC) Clinical Data Acquisition Standards Harmonization (CDASH). Available from: http://www.cdisc.org/CDASH.
34. Fridsma DB, Evans J, Hastak S, Mead CN. The BRIDG project: a technical report. JAMIA 2008; 15: 130-7.
35. Hammond WE, Jaffe C, Kush RD. Healthcare standards development. The value of nurturing collaboration. J AHIMA 2009; 80: 44-50; quiz 1-2.
36. Mead CN. Data interchange standards in healthcare IT-computable semantic interoperability: now possible but still difficult, do we really need a better mousetrap? J Healthc Inf Manag 2006; 20: 71-8.
37. Semantic Interoperability for Better Health and Safer Healthcare. Deployment and Research Roadmap for Europe. 2009.
38. Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise (IHE). Available from: http://www.ihe.net.
39. IHE Quality, Research and Public Health (QRPH) domain. Available from: http://www.ihe.net/Quality_Research_and_Public_Health.
40. Komatsoulis GA, Warzel DB, Hartel FW et al. caCORE version 3: implementation of a model driven, service-oriented architecture for semantic interoperability. J Biomed Inform 2008; 41: 106-23.
41. Warzel DB, Andonaydis C, McCurry B, Chilukuri R, Ishmukhamedov S, Covitz P. Common data element (CDE) management and deployment in clinical trials. AMIA Annu Symp Proc: 2003;1048.
42. Jiang G, Solbrig HR, Iberson-Hurst D, Kush RD, Chute CG. A collaborative framework for representation and harmonization of clinical study data elements using semantic MediaWiki. AMIA Summits Transl Sci Proc 2010; 2010: 11-5.
43. Ngouongo SM, Lobe M, Stausberg J. The ISO/IEC 11179 norm for metadata registries: does it cover healthcare standards in empirical research? J Biomed Inform 2013; 46: 318-27.
44. Scalable, Standard based Interoperability Framework for Sustainable Proactive Post Market Safety Studies (SALUS). Available from: http://www.salusproject.eu.
45. Laleci G, Yuksel M, Dogac A. Providing semantic interoperability between clinical care and clinical research domains. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform 2012; doi: 10.1109/TITB.2012.2219552
46. Ouagne D, Hussain S, Sadou E, Jaulent MC, Daniel C. The Electronic Healthcare Record for Clinical Research (EHR4CR) information model and terminology. Stud Health Technol Inform 2012; 180: 534-8.
47. Jones JB, Stewart WF, Darer JD, Sittig DF. Beyond the threshold: real-time use of evidence in practice. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2013; 13: 47.
48. Opinion 03/2013 of Article 29 data protection working party on "purpose limitation" adopted on 2 April 2013.
49. Hempel C, Lomax G, Peckman S. Broad consent in biobanking. Nat Biotechnol 2012; 30: 826.
50. Steinsbekk KS, Myskja BK, Solberg B. Broad consent versus dynamic consent in biobank research: is passive participation an ethical problem? Eur J Hum Genet 2013; 21: 897-902.
51. Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data. Article 13 para 2; article 32 para 3. Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31995L0046:en:HTML.
52. Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data. Recitals 28 & 29; Article 6 para 1(b).Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31995L0046:en:HTML.
53. Ohm P. Broken premises of privacy: responding to the surprising failure of anonymization. UCLA Law Rev 2010; 57: 1701.
54. Communication from the European Commission on the precautionary principle, COM (2000) 1. Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52000DC0001:EN:NOT
55. Eurobarometer. Data Protection in the European Union. Data controllers' perceptions. Analytical Report. 2008.
56. LeFevre K, DeWitt DJ, Ramakrishnan R. Incognito: efficient full domain k-anonymity. Proc ACM SIGMOD 2005; 49-60.
57. Sun X, Li M, Wang H, Plank A. An efficient hash-based algorithm for minimal k-anonymity. Proc Thirty-First Aust Conf Comp Sci 2008; 74: 101-7.
58. Ciriani V, De Capitani di Vimercati S, Foresti S, Samarati P. k-Anonymity. Yu T, Jajodia S, eds. Secure Data Management in Decentralized Systems. Philadelphia, PA: Springer US, 2007; 323-53.
59. μ-ARGUS. EESnet-project. Statistics Netherlands, 2008.
60. Gross B, Guiblin P, Merrett K. Implementing the Post Randomisation method to the Individual Sample of Anonymised Records (SAR) from the 2001 Census. Statistical Disclosure Control Centre Methodology Group, Office for National Statistics, 2004.
61. Hansen SL, Mukherjee S. A polynomial algorithm for optimal univariate microaggregation. Knowl Data Eng 2003; 15: 1043-4.
62. Arnab Bhattacharya RG. t-closeness: Privacy Preserving Data Mining. 2009.
63. Li TC, Li NH, Zhang J, Molloy I. Slicing: a new approach for privacy preserving data publishing. Knowl Data Eng 2012; 24: 561-74.
64. Machanavajjhala A, Gehrke J, Kifer D, Venkitasubramaniam M. l-diversity: privacy beyond k anonymity. Proceedings of the 22nd Conference on Data Engineering 2007, doi:10.1145/1217299.1217302
65. El Emam K, Dankar FK, Issa R et al. A globally optimal k-anonymity method for the de-identification of health data. JAMIA 2009; 16: 670-82.
66. Domingo-Ferrer J, Sebe F, Solanas A. An Anonymity Model Achievable Via Microaggregation. In: Jonker W, Petkovic M, eds. Secure Data Management. Heidelberg, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2008; 5159: 209-18.
67. Ninghui L, Tiancheng L, Suresh V., t-closeness: privacy beyond k-anonymity l-diversity. Proceedings of the IEEE 23rd International Conference on Data Engineering 2007: 106-15.
68. Samarati P, Sweeney L. Protecting privacy when disclosing information: k-anonymity and its enforcement through generalization and suppression. Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Research in Security and Privacy 1998: 384-93.
69. Truta TM, Campan A, Meyer P. Generating microdata with p-sensitive k-anonymity property. Sec Data Manag Proc 2007; 4721: 124-41.
70. Claerhout B, Forgo N, Krugel T, Arning M, De Moor G. A data protection framework for trans-European genetic research projects. Stud Health Technol Inform 2008; 141: 67-72.
71. Center for Data Protection (CDP). Available from: http://www.privacypeople.org.
72. Aggarwal C, Philips Y. Privacy-Preserving Data Mining. 2008.
73. Chadwick D, Lievens S. Enforcing "Sticky" Security Policies throughout a Distributed Application.
74. Consent in a Trial and Care Environment (CONTRACT). Available from: http://www.contract-fp7.eu.
75. Enabling information re-use by linking clinical research and care (EURECA). Available from: http://eurecaproject.eu
76. Vdovjak R, Claerhout B, Bucur A. BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN CLINICAL RESEARCH AND CARE - Approaches to Semantic Interoperability, Security & Privacy. Proceedings of the International Conference on Health Informatics 2012: 281-6
77. Epstein RS, Sidorov J, Lehner JP, Salimi T. Integrating scientific and real-world evidence within and beyond the drug development process. J Comp Eff Res 2012; 1(Suppl. 1): 9-13.
78. Russo MJ, Balekdjian D. Weighing the outcomes: the emergent healthcare value era, its consequences, and what drug firms need to do about it. Nat Biotechnol 2008; 26: 173-82.
79. Salimi T, Lehner JP, Epstein RS, Tunis SR. A framework for pharmaceutical value-based innovations. J Comp Eff Res 2012; 1(Suppl. 1): 3-7.
80. EFPIA. The Pharmaceutical Industry in Figures. Key Data 2009. Update. 2009; 1-27.
81. Kalra D, Schmidt A, Potts HWW, Dupont D, Sundgren M, De Moor G. Case report from the EHR4CR Project - A European survey on electronic health record systems for clinical research. Health Conn 2011; 1: 108-13.
82. Lehner JP, Epstein RS, Salimi T. Integrating new approaches for clinical development: translational research and relative effectiveness. J Comp Eff Res 2012; 1(Suppl. 1): 15-21.
83. Epstein RS. R&D transformation and value-based innovation. J Comp Eff Res 2012; 1(Suppl. 1): 1-2.
84. Hillestad R, Bigelow J, Bower A et al. Can electronic medical record systems transform health care? Potential health benefits, savings, and costs. Health Aff 2005; 24: 1103-17.
85. Walker J, Pan E, Johnston D, Adler-Milstein J, Bates DW, Middleton B. The value of health care information exchange and interoperability. Health Aff 2005; Suppl Web Exclusives: W5-10-W5-8.
86. i2b2 initiative. Available from: https://www.i2b2.org/
87. eMERGE network. Available from: https://emerge.mc.vanderbilt.edu.
88. Kaiser RPGEH Program. Available from: http://www.dor.kaiser.org/external/dorexternal/rpgeh.
89. Million Veteran Program. Available from: http://www.research.va.gov/mvp/default.cfm.
90. The Stanford Translational Research Integrated Database Environment (STRIDE). Available from: https://clinicalinformatics.stanford.edu/research/stride.html.
91. i4health network. Available from: http://www.i4health.eu.
92. European Medical Information Framework (EMIF). Available from: http://www.imi.europa.eu/content/emif.
93. European Translational Information and Knowledge Management Services (eTRIKS). Available from: http://www.etriks.org.
94. Integrative Cancer Research Through Innovative Biomedical Infrastructures (INTEGRATE). Available from: http://www.fp7-integrate.eu.
95. A Next-Generation, Secure Linked Data Medical Information Space For Semantically-Interconnecting Electronic Health Records and Clinical Trials Systems Advancing Patients Safety In Clinical Research (Linked2Safety). Available from: http://www.linked2safety-project.eu.
96. Translational Research and Patient Safety in Europe (TRANSFoRm). Available from: http://www.transformproject.eu.
97. Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y. Business Model Generation. Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Self Published, 2009. ISBN 978-2-8399-0580-0, 2009.
98. Zott C, Amit R, Massa L. The Business Model: Theoretical Roots, Recent Developments and Future Research. Working Paper WP-862, IESE Business School, University of Navarra 2010: 1-45.
99. Barnes C, Blake H, Pinder D. Creating and delivering your value proposition: managing customer experience for profit. Kogan Page. 2009.