Understanding data differences across the ENACT federated research network.

IF 3.4 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
JAMIA Open Pub Date : 2026-04-03 eCollection Date: 2026-04-01 DOI:10.1093/jamiaopen/ooag038
Taowei D Wang, Darren W Henderson, Griffin M Weber, Michele Morris, Eugene M Sadhu, Shawn N Murphy, Shyam Visweswaran, Jeff G Klann
{"title":"Understanding data differences across the ENACT federated research network.","authors":"Taowei D Wang, Darren W Henderson, Griffin M Weber, Michele Morris, Eugene M Sadhu, Shawn N Murphy, Shyam Visweswaran, Jeff G Klann","doi":"10.1093/jamiaopen/ooag038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Federated research networks, like Evolve to Next-Gen Accrual of patients to Clinical Trials (ENACT), aim to facilitate medical research by exchanging electronic health record (EHR) data. However, poor data quality can hinder this goal. While networks typically set guidelines and standards to address this problem, we developed an organically evolving, data-centric method using patient counts to identify data quality issues, applicable even to sites not yet in the network.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We distribute high-performance patient counting scripts as part of Integrating Biology at the Bedside (i2b2), which all ENACT sites operate. They produce counts of patients associated with ENACT ontology terms for each site. At the ENACT Hub, our pipeline aggregates site-contributed counts to produce network statistics, which our self-service web application, Data Quality Explorer (DQE), ingests to help sites conduct data quality investigation relative to the network.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen ENACT sites have contributed their patient counts, and currently ten sites have signed up to use DQE to analyze data quality issues. We announced a call to all ENACT sites to contribute additional patient counts.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Identifying site data quality problems relative to the network is novel. Using a metric based on evolving network statistics complements rigid data quality checks. It is adaptable to any network and has low barriers of entry, with patient counting being the sole requirement.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We implemented a metric for conducting data quality investigation in ENACT using patient counting and network statistics. Our end-to-end pipeline is privacy-preserving and the underlying design is generalizable.</p>","PeriodicalId":36278,"journal":{"name":"JAMIA Open","volume":"9 2","pages":"ooag038"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13049201/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMIA Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jamiaopen/ooag038","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Federated research networks, like Evolve to Next-Gen Accrual of patients to Clinical Trials (ENACT), aim to facilitate medical research by exchanging electronic health record (EHR) data. However, poor data quality can hinder this goal. While networks typically set guidelines and standards to address this problem, we developed an organically evolving, data-centric method using patient counts to identify data quality issues, applicable even to sites not yet in the network.

Materials and methods: We distribute high-performance patient counting scripts as part of Integrating Biology at the Bedside (i2b2), which all ENACT sites operate. They produce counts of patients associated with ENACT ontology terms for each site. At the ENACT Hub, our pipeline aggregates site-contributed counts to produce network statistics, which our self-service web application, Data Quality Explorer (DQE), ingests to help sites conduct data quality investigation relative to the network.

Results: Thirteen ENACT sites have contributed their patient counts, and currently ten sites have signed up to use DQE to analyze data quality issues. We announced a call to all ENACT sites to contribute additional patient counts.

Discussion: Identifying site data quality problems relative to the network is novel. Using a metric based on evolving network statistics complements rigid data quality checks. It is adaptable to any network and has low barriers of entry, with patient counting being the sole requirement.

Conclusion: We implemented a metric for conducting data quality investigation in ENACT using patient counting and network statistics. Our end-to-end pipeline is privacy-preserving and the underlying design is generalizable.

了解跨ENACT联邦研究网络的数据差异。
目的:联邦研究网络,如演进到下一代临床试验患者权计(ENACT),旨在通过交换电子健康记录(EHR)数据来促进医学研究。然而,糟糕的数据质量可能会阻碍这一目标的实现。虽然网络通常会制定指导方针和标准来解决这个问题,但我们开发了一种有机发展的、以数据为中心的方法,使用患者计数来识别数据质量问题,甚至适用于尚未纳入网络的站点。材料和方法:我们分发高性能的患者计数脚本,作为床边整合生物学(i2b2)的一部分,所有ENACT站点都在使用。它们为每个站点生成与ENACT本体术语相关的患者计数。在ENACT Hub中,我们的管道聚合站点贡献的计数以生成网络统计数据,我们的自助服务web应用程序数据质量浏览器(Data Quality Explorer, DQE)获取这些统计数据,以帮助站点进行与网络相关的数据质量调查。结果:13个ENACT网站贡献了他们的患者数量,目前有10个网站已经注册使用DQE来分析数据质量问题。我们宣布呼吁所有ENACT中心提供额外的患者计数。讨论:识别与网络相关的站点数据质量问题是新颖的。使用基于不断发展的网络统计的度量来补充严格的数据质量检查。它适用于任何网络,并且具有较低的进入门槛,患者计数是唯一的要求。结论:我们使用患者计数和网络统计实现了一种进行ENACT数据质量调查的度量。我们的端到端管道是隐私保护的,底层设计是通用的。
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
JAMIA Open
JAMIA Open Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.80%
发文量
102
审稿时长
16 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