Real-world data landscape for glaucoma in Europe: a questionnaire-based analysis of resources among European Glaucoma Society members.

IF 2.7 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Marta Pazos, Andrew Tatham, Danilo Andrade De Jesus, Luisa Sanchez Brea, Stefan Klein, David Wright, Augusto Azuara-Blanco, Fotis Topouzis, Ananth Viswanathan
{"title":"Real-world data landscape for glaucoma in Europe: a questionnaire-based analysis of resources among European Glaucoma Society members.","authors":"Marta Pazos, Andrew Tatham, Danilo Andrade De Jesus, Luisa Sanchez Brea, Stefan Klein, David Wright, Augusto Azuara-Blanco, Fotis Topouzis, Ananth Viswanathan","doi":"10.1136/bmjophth-2024-002111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/aims: </strong>To investigate the landscape to support Europe-wide collaborative real-world data (RWD) collection, exploring whether required resources are available to glaucoma clinicians.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study employed a two-phase method, including two consecutive electronic questionnaires. For phase I, a survey was distributed to all European Glaucoma Society members inquiring about use of electronic medical records (EMRs). For phase II, EMR users who expressed their interest in contributing to a European RWD were surveyed regarding EMR data characteristics and technical resources.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Phase I garnered responses from 201 glaucoma specialists, with 68% reporting use of an EMR. Among them, 47% and 65% reported over 90% of coding rates for diagnoses and medications, respectively. Despite the EMR making available report copies for perimetry (27%) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) (37%), automatic data extraction capabilities were limited to only 10% and 8%. 47 participants responded to phase II. Their practices saw an average of 415 glaucoma patients per month. Date of intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement was the most commonly available structured data (67%), followed by visual acuity (59%) and IOP (56%). 46% had access to central computing systems, with 41% reporting past experience in federated learning initiatives and 73% willing contribution. 34% reported involvement in the development of artificial intelligence algorithms.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study highlights a noteworthy EMR use among European glaucoma specialists, with structured data for metrics like IOP, but identifies gaps in data extraction capabilities. Major challenges include EMR heterogeneity, lack of standardised outcomes, healthcare system differences and cost. A combined approach using structured coding, digitised EMR data and semistructured OCT/perimetry data is recommended.</p>","PeriodicalId":9286,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Ophthalmology","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12574383/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjophth-2024-002111","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/aims: To investigate the landscape to support Europe-wide collaborative real-world data (RWD) collection, exploring whether required resources are available to glaucoma clinicians.

Methods: This cross-sectional study employed a two-phase method, including two consecutive electronic questionnaires. For phase I, a survey was distributed to all European Glaucoma Society members inquiring about use of electronic medical records (EMRs). For phase II, EMR users who expressed their interest in contributing to a European RWD were surveyed regarding EMR data characteristics and technical resources.

Results: Phase I garnered responses from 201 glaucoma specialists, with 68% reporting use of an EMR. Among them, 47% and 65% reported over 90% of coding rates for diagnoses and medications, respectively. Despite the EMR making available report copies for perimetry (27%) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) (37%), automatic data extraction capabilities were limited to only 10% and 8%. 47 participants responded to phase II. Their practices saw an average of 415 glaucoma patients per month. Date of intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement was the most commonly available structured data (67%), followed by visual acuity (59%) and IOP (56%). 46% had access to central computing systems, with 41% reporting past experience in federated learning initiatives and 73% willing contribution. 34% reported involvement in the development of artificial intelligence algorithms.

Conclusion: This study highlights a noteworthy EMR use among European glaucoma specialists, with structured data for metrics like IOP, but identifies gaps in data extraction capabilities. Major challenges include EMR heterogeneity, lack of standardised outcomes, healthcare system differences and cost. A combined approach using structured coding, digitised EMR data and semistructured OCT/perimetry data is recommended.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

欧洲青光眼的真实世界数据景观:基于问卷的欧洲青光眼协会成员资源分析。
背景/目的:调查支持全欧洲协作真实世界数据(RWD)收集的情况,探索青光眼临床医生是否可以获得所需的资源。方法:横断面研究采用两阶段法,包括两份连续的电子问卷。在第一阶段,向所有欧洲青光眼协会成员分发了一份调查,询问电子医疗记录(EMRs)的使用情况。在第二阶段,对那些表示有兴趣参与欧洲RWD的EMR用户进行了关于EMR数据特征和技术资源的调查。结果:第一阶段获得了201名青光眼专家的反馈,68%的人报告使用了EMR。其中,47%和65%的人分别报告了超过90%的诊断和药物编码率。尽管EMR可以提供眼部检查(27%)和光学相干断层扫描(OCT)(37%)的报告副本,但自动数据提取能力仅限于10%和8%。47名参与者对第二阶段有反应。他们每月平均治疗415名青光眼患者。眼压(IOP)测量数据是最常见的结构化数据(67%),其次是视力(59%)和IOP(56%)。46%的人可以访问中央计算系统,41%的人报告了联邦学习计划的过去经验,73%的人愿意贡献。34%的人表示参与了人工智能算法的开发。结论:该研究突出了欧洲青光眼专家中值得注意的EMR使用情况,具有IOP等指标的结构化数据,但发现了数据提取能力方面的差距。主要的挑战包括电子病历的异质性、缺乏标准化的结果、医疗保健系统的差异和成本。推荐使用结构化编码、数字化EMR数据和半结构化OCT/视野数据的组合方法。
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
BMJ Open Ophthalmology
BMJ Open Ophthalmology OPHTHALMOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
104
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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
小红书