现有可行性工具对临床研究数据平台的适应性

Q3 Health Professions
Marie-Louise Witte, Anne Schoneberg, Sabine Hanss, Martin Lablans, Janne Vehreschild, Dagmar Krefting
{"title":"现有可行性工具对临床研究数据平台的适应性","authors":"Marie-Louise Witte,&nbsp;Anne Schoneberg,&nbsp;Sabine Hanss,&nbsp;Martin Lablans,&nbsp;Janne Vehreschild,&nbsp;Dagmar Krefting","doi":"10.3233/SHTI230691","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The increasing need for secondary use of clinical study data requires FAIR infrastructures, i.e. provide findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable data. It is crucial for data scientists to assess the number and distribution of cohorts that meet complex combinations of criteria defined by the research question. This so-called feasibility test is increasingly offered as a self-service, where scientists can filter the available data according to specific parameters. Early feasibility tools have been developed for biosamples or image collections. They are of high interest for clinical study platforms that federate multiple studies and data types, but they pose specific requirements on the integration of data sources and data protection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Mandatory and desired requirements for such tools were acquired from two user groups - primary users and staff managing a platform's transfer office. Open Source feasibility tools were sought by different literature search strategies and evaluated on their adaptability to the requirements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified seven feasibility tools that we evaluated based on six mandatory properties.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>We determined five feasibility tools to be most promising candidates for adaption to a clinical study research data platform, the Clinical Communication Platform, the German Portal for Medical Research Data, the Feasibility Explorer, Medical Controlling, and the Sample Locator.</p>","PeriodicalId":39242,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Health Technology and Informatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adaptability of Existing Feasibility Tools for Clinical Study Research Data Platforms.\",\"authors\":\"Marie-Louise Witte,&nbsp;Anne Schoneberg,&nbsp;Sabine Hanss,&nbsp;Martin Lablans,&nbsp;Janne Vehreschild,&nbsp;Dagmar Krefting\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/SHTI230691\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The increasing need for secondary use of clinical study data requires FAIR infrastructures, i.e. provide findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable data. It is crucial for data scientists to assess the number and distribution of cohorts that meet complex combinations of criteria defined by the research question. This so-called feasibility test is increasingly offered as a self-service, where scientists can filter the available data according to specific parameters. Early feasibility tools have been developed for biosamples or image collections. They are of high interest for clinical study platforms that federate multiple studies and data types, but they pose specific requirements on the integration of data sources and data protection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Mandatory and desired requirements for such tools were acquired from two user groups - primary users and staff managing a platform's transfer office. Open Source feasibility tools were sought by different literature search strategies and evaluated on their adaptability to the requirements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified seven feasibility tools that we evaluated based on six mandatory properties.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>We determined five feasibility tools to be most promising candidates for adaption to a clinical study research data platform, the Clinical Communication Platform, the German Portal for Medical Research Data, the Feasibility Explorer, Medical Controlling, and the Sample Locator.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39242,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Health Technology and Informatics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Health Technology and Informatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/SHTI230691\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Health Professions\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Health Technology and Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/SHTI230691","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对临床研究数据二次使用的需求日益增加,这就需要公平的基础设施,即提供可查找、可访问、可互操作和可重复使用的数据。对于数据科学家来说,评估满足研究问题定义的复杂标准组合的队列的数量和分布是至关重要的。这种所谓的可行性测试越来越多地作为一种自助服务提供,科学家可以根据特定的参数过滤可用的数据。已经开发了用于生物样本或图像收集的早期可行性工具。它们对于联合多个研究和数据类型的临床研究平台具有很高的兴趣,但它们对数据源和数据保护的集成提出了特定的要求。方法:从两个用户组(主要用户和管理平台中转办公室的工作人员)中获取此类工具的强制性和期望需求。采用不同的文献检索策略寻找开源可行性工具,并评估其对需求的适应性。结果:我们确定了七个可行性工具,我们根据六个强制性属性进行了评估。讨论:我们确定了五个最有希望适用于临床研究数据平台、临床交流平台、德国医学研究数据门户、可行性探索者、医学控制和样本定位器的可行性工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Adaptability of Existing Feasibility Tools for Clinical Study Research Data Platforms.

Introduction: The increasing need for secondary use of clinical study data requires FAIR infrastructures, i.e. provide findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable data. It is crucial for data scientists to assess the number and distribution of cohorts that meet complex combinations of criteria defined by the research question. This so-called feasibility test is increasingly offered as a self-service, where scientists can filter the available data according to specific parameters. Early feasibility tools have been developed for biosamples or image collections. They are of high interest for clinical study platforms that federate multiple studies and data types, but they pose specific requirements on the integration of data sources and data protection.

Methods: Mandatory and desired requirements for such tools were acquired from two user groups - primary users and staff managing a platform's transfer office. Open Source feasibility tools were sought by different literature search strategies and evaluated on their adaptability to the requirements.

Results: We identified seven feasibility tools that we evaluated based on six mandatory properties.

Discussion: We determined five feasibility tools to be most promising candidates for adaption to a clinical study research data platform, the Clinical Communication Platform, the German Portal for Medical Research Data, the Feasibility Explorer, Medical Controlling, and the Sample Locator.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Studies in Health Technology and Informatics
Studies in Health Technology and Informatics Health Professions-Health Information Management
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1463
期刊介绍: This book series was started in 1990 to promote research conducted under the auspices of the EC programmes’ Advanced Informatics in Medicine (AIM) and Biomedical and Health Research (BHR) bioengineering branch. A driving aspect of international health informatics is that telecommunication technology, rehabilitative technology, intelligent home technology and many other components are moving together and form one integrated world of information and communication media.
×
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