Raising the Bar for Real-World Data in Oncology: Approaches to Quality Across Multiple Dimensions.

IF 3.3 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Emily H Castellanos, Brett K Wittmershaus, Sheenu Chandwani
{"title":"Raising the Bar for Real-World Data in Oncology: Approaches to Quality Across Multiple Dimensions.","authors":"Emily H Castellanos, Brett K Wittmershaus, Sheenu Chandwani","doi":"10.1200/CCI.23.00046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Electronic health record (EHR)-based real-world data (RWD) are integral to oncology research, and understanding fitness for use is critical for data users. Complexity of data sources and curation methods necessitate transparency into how quality is approached. We describe the application of data quality dimensions in curating EHR-derived oncology RWD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A targeted review was conducted to summarize data quality dimensions in frameworks published by the European Medicines Agency, The National Institute for Healthcare and Excellence, US Food and Drug Administration, Duke-Margolis Center for Health Policy, and Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. We then characterized quality processes applied to curation of Flatiron Health RWD, which originate from EHRs of a nationwide network of academic and community cancer clinics, across the summarized quality dimensions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The primary quality dimensions across frameworks were <i>relevance</i> (including subdimensions of availability, sufficiency, and representativeness) and <i>reliability</i> (including subdimensions of accuracy, completeness, provenance, and timeliness). Flatiron Health RWD quality processes were aligned to each dimension. Relevancy to broad or specific use cases is optimized through data set size and variable breadth and depth. Accuracy is addressed using validation approaches, such as comparison with external or internal reference standards or indirect benchmarking, and verification checks for conformance, consistency, and plausibility, selected on the basis of feasibility and criticality of the variable to the intended use case. Completeness is assessed against expected source documentation; provenance by recording data transformation, management procedures, and auditable metadata; and timeliness by setting refresh frequency to minimize data lags.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Development of high-quality, scaled, EHR-based RWD requires integration of systematic processes across the data lifecycle. Approaches to quality are optimized through knowledge of data sources, curation processes, and use case needs. By addressing quality dimensions from published frameworks, Flatiron Health RWD enable transparency in determining fitness for real-world evidence generation.</p>","PeriodicalId":51626,"journal":{"name":"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10807898/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/CCI.23.00046","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Electronic health record (EHR)-based real-world data (RWD) are integral to oncology research, and understanding fitness for use is critical for data users. Complexity of data sources and curation methods necessitate transparency into how quality is approached. We describe the application of data quality dimensions in curating EHR-derived oncology RWD.

Methods: A targeted review was conducted to summarize data quality dimensions in frameworks published by the European Medicines Agency, The National Institute for Healthcare and Excellence, US Food and Drug Administration, Duke-Margolis Center for Health Policy, and Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. We then characterized quality processes applied to curation of Flatiron Health RWD, which originate from EHRs of a nationwide network of academic and community cancer clinics, across the summarized quality dimensions.

Results: The primary quality dimensions across frameworks were relevance (including subdimensions of availability, sufficiency, and representativeness) and reliability (including subdimensions of accuracy, completeness, provenance, and timeliness). Flatiron Health RWD quality processes were aligned to each dimension. Relevancy to broad or specific use cases is optimized through data set size and variable breadth and depth. Accuracy is addressed using validation approaches, such as comparison with external or internal reference standards or indirect benchmarking, and verification checks for conformance, consistency, and plausibility, selected on the basis of feasibility and criticality of the variable to the intended use case. Completeness is assessed against expected source documentation; provenance by recording data transformation, management procedures, and auditable metadata; and timeliness by setting refresh frequency to minimize data lags.

Conclusion: Development of high-quality, scaled, EHR-based RWD requires integration of systematic processes across the data lifecycle. Approaches to quality are optimized through knowledge of data sources, curation processes, and use case needs. By addressing quality dimensions from published frameworks, Flatiron Health RWD enable transparency in determining fitness for real-world evidence generation.

提高肿瘤学真实世界数据的标准:从多个维度提高质量的方法。
目的:基于电子健康记录(EHR)的真实世界数据(RWD)是肿瘤学研究不可或缺的一部分,了解数据的适用性对数据用户来说至关重要。数据源和整理方法的复杂性要求数据质量的透明度。我们介绍了在整理电子病历衍生的肿瘤学 RWD 时应用数据质量维度的情况:我们进行了有针对性的回顾,总结了欧洲药品管理局、美国国家医疗保健与卓越研究所、美国食品药品管理局、杜克大学马戈利斯卫生政策中心和以患者为中心的结果研究所发布的框架中的数据质量维度。然后,我们根据总结出的质量维度,描述了用于Flatiron Health RWD(源自全国范围内的学术和社区癌症诊所网络的电子病历)整理的质量流程:各框架的主要质量维度是相关性(包括可用性、充分性和代表性等子维度)和可靠性(包括准确性、完整性、出处和及时性等子维度)。Flatiron Health RWD 质量流程与每个维度保持一致。通过数据集的规模和不同的广度和深度,优化与广泛或特定用例的相关性。准确性通过验证方法来解决,如与外部或内部参考标准或间接基准进行比较,以及对一致性、连贯性和合理性进行验证检查,这些都是根据可行性和变量对预期用例的关键性来选择的。根据预期的源文件评估完整性;通过记录数据转换、管理程序和可审计的元数据评估出处;通过设置刷新频率最大限度地减少数据滞后来评估及时性:开发高质量、大规模、基于电子病历的 RWD 需要整合整个数据生命周期的系统流程。通过了解数据源、整理流程和用例需求,可以优化质量方法。通过解决已发布框架中的质量问题,Flatiron Health RWD 在确定是否适合生成真实世界的证据方面实现了透明化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.80%
发文量
190
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信