Del Fiol, Guilherme

Abstract Objectives Embedded pragmatic clinical trials (ePCTs) are conducted as part of routine clinical care and therefore use data collected from real-world data sources, such as electronic health record systems and administrative claims. A common approach for using these types of data across all phases of trial conduct is to create a computable phenotype (an explicitly defined data query data, including specified data types, data codes, and logical parameters) to capture patients with a clinical condition, exposure, symptom, characteristic, treatment, or outcome of interest. Materials and Methods The Electronic Health Record (EHR) Core Working Group of the NIH Pragmatic Trials Collaboratory captured the experiences of investigators in developing, adapting, and applying computable phenotype definitions in their studies. Results Four case studies describe different approaches to developing and using computable phenotypes in pragmatic trials. Discussion We recommend: (1) developing computable phenotypes as part of a team with multiple areas of expertise; (2) appropriate validation; (3) dissemination of salient details regarding phenotype creation; and (4) capturing and reporting any modifications made to phenotypes during the conduct of the trial. Conclusion A range of issues and decisions influence how computable phenotypes are developed and used in pragmatic clinical trials. Multidisciplinary teams that understand the context of the data, including the reason the data are collected and potential sources of bias, are best suited for the development and validation of phenotypes for ePCTs.

Abstract Embedded pragmatic clinical trials (ePCTs) play a vital role in addressing current population health problems, and their use of electronic health record (EHR) systems promises efficiencies that will increase the speed and volume of relevant and generalizable research. However, as the number of ePCTs using EHR-derived data grows, so does the risk that research will become more vulnerable to biases due to differences in data capture and access to care for different subsets of the population, thereby propagating inequities in health and the healthcare system. We identify 3 challenges—incomplete and variable capture of data on social determinants of health, lack of representation of vulnerable populations that do not access or receive treatment, and data loss due to variable use of technology—that exacerbate bias when working with EHR data and offer recommendations and examples of ways to actively mitigate bias.

Abstract Objective The Genomic Medicine Working Group of the National Advisory Council for Human Genome Research virtually hosted its 13th genomic medicine meeting titled “Developing a Clinical Genomic Informatics Research Agenda”. The meeting’s goal was to articulate a research strategy to develop Genomics-based Clinical Informatics Tools and Resources (GCIT) to improve the detection, treatment, and reporting of genetic disorders in clinical settings. Materials and Methods Experts from government agencies, the private sector, and academia in genomic medicine and clinical informatics were invited to address the meeting's goals. Invitees were also asked to complete a survey to assess important considerations needed to develop a genomic-based clinical informatics research strategy. Results Outcomes from the meeting included identifying short-term research needs, such as designing and implementing standards-based interfaces between laboratory information systems and electronic health records, as well as long-term projects, such as identifying and addressing barriers related to the establishment and implementation of genomic data exchange systems that, in turn, the research community could help address. Discussion Discussions centered on identifying gaps and barriers that impede the use of GCIT in genomic medicine. Emergent themes from the meeting included developing an implementation science framework, defining a value proposition for all stakeholders, fostering engagement with patients and partners to develop applications under patient control, promoting the use of relevant clinical workflows in research, and lowering related barriers to regulatory processes. Another key theme was recognizing pervasive biases in data and information systems, algorithms, access, value, and knowledge repositories and identifying ways to resolve them.

Objective: Infobuttons appear as small icons adjacent to electronic health record (EHR) data (e.g., medications, diagnoses, or test results) that, when clicked, access online knowledge resources tailored to the patient, care setting, or task. Infobuttons are required for “Meaningful Use” certification of US EHRs. We sought to evaluate infobuttons’ impact on clinical practice and identify features associated with improved outcomes. Methods: We conducted a systematic review, searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and other databases from inception to July 6, 2015. We included and cataloged all original research in any language describing implementation of infobuttons or other context-sensitive links. Studies evaluating clinical implementations with outcomes of usage or impact were reviewed in greater detail. Reviewers worked in duplicate to select articles, evaluate quality, and abstract information. Results: Of 599 potential articles, 77 described infobutton implementation. The 17 studies meriting detailed review, including 3 randomized trials, yielded the following findings. Infobutton usage frequency ranged from 0.3 to 7.4 uses per month per potential user. Usage appeared to be influenced by EHR task. Five studies found that infobuttons are used less often than non–context-sensitive links (proportionate usage 0.20–0.34). In 3 studies, users answered their clinical question in > 69% of infobutton sessions. Seven studies evaluated alternative approaches to infobutton design and implementation. No studies isolated the impact of infobuttons on objectively measured patient outcomes. Conclusions: Weak evidence suggests that infobuttons can help providers answer clinical questions. Research on optimal infobutton design and implementation, and on the impact on patient outcomes and provider behaviors, is needed.