22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Drawing Reproducible Conclusions from Observational Clinical Data with OHDSI

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Summary

          Objective : The current observational research literature shows extensive publication bias and contradiction. The Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) initiative seeks to improve research reproducibility through open science.

          Methods : OHDSI has created an international federated data source of electronic health records and administrative claims that covers nearly 10% of the world’s population. Using a common data model with a practical schema and extensive vocabulary mappings, data from around the world follow the identical format. OHDSI’s research methods emphasize reproducibility, with a large-scale approach to addressing confounding using propensity score adjustment with extensive diagnostics; negative and positive control hypotheses to test for residual systematic error; a variety of data sources to assess consistency and generalizability; a completely open approach including protocol, software, models, parameters, and raw results so that studies can be externally verified; and the study of many hypotheses in parallel so that the operating characteristics of the methods can be assessed.

          Results : OHDSI has already produced findings in areas like hypertension treatment that are being incorporated into practice, and it has produced rigorous studies of COVID-19 that have aided government agencies in their treatment decisions, that have characterized the disease extensively, that have estimated the comparative effects of treatments, and that the predict likelihood of advancing to serious complications.

          Conclusions : OHDSI practices open science and incorporates a series of methods to address reproducibility. It has produced important results in several areas, including hypertension therapy and COVID-19 research.

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Regression Shrinkage and Selection Via the Lasso

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples

              The propensity score is a subject's probability of treatment, conditional on observed baseline covariates. Conditional on the true propensity score, treated and untreated subjects have similar distributions of observed baseline covariates. Propensity-score matching is a popular method of using the propensity score in the medical literature. Using this approach, matched sets of treated and untreated subjects with similar values of the propensity score are formed. Inferences about treatment effect made using propensity-score matching are valid only if, in the matched sample, treated and untreated subjects have similar distributions of measured baseline covariates. In this paper we discuss the following methods for assessing whether the propensity score model has been correctly specified: comparing means and prevalences of baseline characteristics using standardized differences; ratios comparing the variance of continuous covariates between treated and untreated subjects; comparison of higher order moments and interactions; five-number summaries; and graphical methods such as quantile–quantile plots, side-by-side boxplots, and non-parametric density plots for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups. We describe methods to determine the sampling distribution of the standardized difference when the true standardized difference is equal to zero, thereby allowing one to determine the range of standardized differences that are plausible with the propensity score model having been correctly specified. We highlight the limitations of some previously used methods for assessing the adequacy of the specification of the propensity-score model. In particular, methods based on comparing the distribution of the estimated propensity score between treated and untreated subjects are uninformative. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Yearb Med Inform
                Yearb Med Inform
                10.1055/s-00034612
                Yearbook of Medical Informatics
                Georg Thieme Verlag KG (Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany )
                0943-4747
                2364-0502
                August 2021
                21 April 2021
                1 April 2021
                : 30
                : 1
                : 283-289
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA
                [2 ]Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics, New York, New York, USA
                [3 ]Epidemiology Analytics, Janssen Research and Development, Titusville, New Jersey, USA
                [4 ]Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
                [5 ]Fielding School of Public Health, Department of Biostatistics, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, USA
                [6 ]David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Biomathematics, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, USA
                Author notes
                Correspondence to George Hripcsak, MD, MS Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University Irving Medical Center 622 W 168th St PH20, New York, NY 10027USA hripcsak@ 123456columbia.edu
                Article
                hripcsak
                10.1055/s-0041-1726481
                8416226
                33882595
                9960cefd-f7a9-44b4-ac6e-ff1053dbe3c0
                IMIA and Thieme. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ )

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Categories
                Research & Education

                observational research,reproducibility
                observational research, reproducibility

                Comments

                Comment on this article