Best practices to design, plan, and execute large-scale federated analyses - key learnings and suggestions from a study comprising 52 databases.

IF 2.2 2区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL INFORMATICS
Theresa Burkard, Montse Camprubi, Daniel Prieto-Alhambra, Peter Rijnbeek, Marta Pineda Moncusi
{"title":"Best practices to design, plan, and execute large-scale federated analyses - key learnings and suggestions from a study comprising 52 databases.","authors":"Theresa Burkard, Montse Camprubi, Daniel Prieto-Alhambra, Peter Rijnbeek, Marta Pineda Moncusi","doi":"10.1055/a-2710-4226","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and significance: </strong>Federated network studies allow data to remain locally while the research is conducted through sharing of analytical code and aggregated results across different healthcare settings and countries. A large number of databases have been mapped to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM), boosting the use of analytical pipelines for standardized observational research within this open science framework. Transparency, reproducibility, and robustness of results have positioned federated analyses using the OMOP CDM within the European Health Data and Evidence Network (EHDEN) as an essential tool for generating large-scale evidence.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We conducted large-scale federated analyses involving 52 databases from 19 countries using the OMOP CDM. In this State of the Art / Best practice article, we aimed to share key lessons and strategies for conducting such complex, large multi-database analyses. Learnings and suggestions: Meticulous planning, establishing a strong community of collaborators, efficient communication channels, standardized analytics, and strategic division of responsibilities are essential. We highlight the benefits of network engagement, cross-fertilization of ideas, and shared learning. Further key elements contributing to the study's success included an inclusive, incremental implementation of the analytical code, timely engagement of data partners, and community webinars to discuss and interpret study findings. We received predominantly positive feedback from data custodians about their participation, and included input for further improvements for future large-scale federated network studies from this shared learning experience.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our learnings and suggestions aim to help other teams conduct large-scale multinational federated network studies efficiently and within a timely manner. The successful execution of such analyses, as demonstrated here, fostered positive experiences for data partners and stakeholders, encouraging future participation and contributing to sustainable large-scale evidence generation.</p>","PeriodicalId":48956,"journal":{"name":"Applied Clinical Informatics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Clinical Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2710-4226","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and significance: Federated network studies allow data to remain locally while the research is conducted through sharing of analytical code and aggregated results across different healthcare settings and countries. A large number of databases have been mapped to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM), boosting the use of analytical pipelines for standardized observational research within this open science framework. Transparency, reproducibility, and robustness of results have positioned federated analyses using the OMOP CDM within the European Health Data and Evidence Network (EHDEN) as an essential tool for generating large-scale evidence.

Objectives: We conducted large-scale federated analyses involving 52 databases from 19 countries using the OMOP CDM. In this State of the Art / Best practice article, we aimed to share key lessons and strategies for conducting such complex, large multi-database analyses. Learnings and suggestions: Meticulous planning, establishing a strong community of collaborators, efficient communication channels, standardized analytics, and strategic division of responsibilities are essential. We highlight the benefits of network engagement, cross-fertilization of ideas, and shared learning. Further key elements contributing to the study's success included an inclusive, incremental implementation of the analytical code, timely engagement of data partners, and community webinars to discuss and interpret study findings. We received predominantly positive feedback from data custodians about their participation, and included input for further improvements for future large-scale federated network studies from this shared learning experience.

Conclusion: Our learnings and suggestions aim to help other teams conduct large-scale multinational federated network studies efficiently and within a timely manner. The successful execution of such analyses, as demonstrated here, fostered positive experiences for data partners and stakeholders, encouraging future participation and contributing to sustainable large-scale evidence generation.

设计、计划和执行大规模联邦分析的最佳实践——来自包含52个数据库的研究的关键学习和建议。
背景和意义:联邦网络研究允许数据保留在本地,同时通过在不同医疗保健环境和国家/地区共享分析代码和汇总结果进行研究。大量数据库已被映射到观察性医疗成果伙伴关系(OMOP)公共数据模型(CDM),促进了在这一开放科学框架内对标准化观察研究的分析管道的使用。结果的透明度、可重复性和稳健性使欧洲卫生数据和证据网络(EHDEN)内使用OMOP CDM的联合分析成为生成大规模证据的基本工具。目的:我们使用OMOP CDM对来自19个国家的52个数据库进行了大规模的联合分析。在这篇最新技术/最佳实践文章中,我们旨在分享进行如此复杂的大型多数据库分析的关键经验和策略。学习和建议:细致的计划、建立强大的合作者社区、有效的沟通渠道、标准化的分析和战略性的责任划分是必不可少的。我们强调网络参与、思想交流和共享学习的好处。促进研究成功的其他关键因素包括分析代码的包容性、渐进式实施、数据合作伙伴的及时参与以及社区网络研讨会讨论和解释研究结果。我们主要从数据管理员那里收到了关于他们参与的积极反馈,并从这个共享的学习经验中为未来的大规模联邦网络研究提供了进一步改进的输入。结论:我们的学习和建议旨在帮助其他团队高效、及时地进行大规模跨国联合网络研究。如本文所示,此类分析的成功实施为数据合作伙伴和利益攸关方积累了积极经验,鼓励了未来的参与,并为可持续的大规模证据生成做出了贡献。
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
Applied Clinical Informatics
Applied Clinical Informatics MEDICAL INFORMATICS-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
24.10%
发文量
132
期刊介绍: ACI is the third Schattauer journal dealing with biomedical and health informatics. It perfectly complements our other journals Öffnet internen Link im aktuellen FensterMethods of Information in Medicine and the Öffnet internen Link im aktuellen FensterYearbook of Medical Informatics. The Yearbook of Medical Informatics being the “Milestone” or state-of-the-art journal and Methods of Information in Medicine being the “Science and Research” journal of IMIA, ACI intends to be the “Practical” journal of IMIA.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信