Speltz, Peter

Abstract Electronic health record (EHR) algorithms for defining patient cohorts are commonly shared as free-text descriptions that require human intervention both to interpret and implement. We developed the Phenotype Execution and Modeling Architecture (PhEMA, http://projectphema.org) to author and execute standardized computable phenotype algorithms. With PhEMA, we converted an algorithm for benign prostatic hyperplasia, developed for the electronic Medical Records and Genomics network (eMERGE), into a standards-based computable format. Eight sites (7 within eMERGE) received the computable algorithm, and 6 successfully executed it against local data warehouses and/or i2b2 instances. Blinded random chart review of cases selected by the computable algorithm shows PPV ≥90%, and 3 out of 5 sites had >90% overlap of selected cases when comparing the computable algorithm to their original eMERGE implementation. This case study demonstrates potential use of PhEMA computable representations to automate phenotyping across different EHR systems, but also highlights some ongoing challenges.

Abstract Objective Health care generated data have become an important source for clinical and genomic research. Often, investigators create and iteratively refine phenotype algorithms to achieve high positive predictive values (PPVs) or sensitivity, thereby identifying valid cases and controls. These algorithms achieve the greatest utility when validated and shared by multiple health care systems. Materials and Methods We report the current status and impact of the Phenotype KnowledgeBase (PheKB, http://phekb.org ), an online environment supporting the workflow of building, sharing, and validating electronic phenotype algorithms. We analyze the most frequent components used in algorithms and their performance at authoring institutions and secondary implementation sites. Results As of June 2015, PheKB contained 30 finalized phenotype algorithms and 62 algorithms in development spanning a range of traits and diseases. Phenotypes have had over 3500 unique views in a 6-month period and have been reused by other institutions. International Classification of Disease codes were the most frequently used component, followed by medications and natural language processing. Among algorithms with published performance data, the median PPV was nearly identical when evaluated at the authoring institutions (n = 44; case 96.0%, control 100%) compared to implementation sites (n = 40; case 97.5%, control 100%). Discussion These results demonstrate that a broad range of algorithms to mine electronic health record data from different health systems can be developed with high PPV, and algorithms developed at one site are generally transportable to others. Conclusion By providing a central repository, PheKB enables improved development, transportability, and validity of algorithms for research-grade phenotypes using health care generated data.

AbstractBackground Electronic health records (EHRs) are increasingly used for clinical and translational research through the creation of phenotype algorithms. Currently, phenotype algorithms are most commonly represented as noncomputable descriptive documents and knowledge artifacts that detail the protocols for querying diagnoses, symptoms, procedures, medications, and/or text-driven medical concepts, and are primarily meant for human comprehension. We present desiderata for developing a computable phenotype representation model (PheRM).Methods A team of clinicians and informaticians reviewed common features for multisite phenotype algorithms published in PheKB.org and existing phenotype representation platforms. We also evaluated well-known diagnostic criteria and clinical decision-making guidelines to encompass a broader category of algorithms.Results We propose 10 desired characteristics for a flexible, computable PheRM: (1) structure clinical data into queryable forms; (2) recommend use of a common data model, but also support customization for the variability and availability of EHR data among sites; (3) support both human-readable and computable representations of phenotype algorithms; (4) implement set operations and relational algebra for modeling phenotype algorithms; (5) represent phenotype criteria with structured rules; (6) support defining temporal relations between events; (7) use standardized terminologies and ontologies, and facilitate reuse of value sets; (8) define representations for text searching and natural language processing; (9) provide interfaces for external software algorithms; and (10) maintain backward compatibility.Conclusion A computable PheRM is needed for true phenotype portability and reliability across different EHR products and healthcare systems. These desiderata are a guide to inform the establishment and evolution of EHR phenotype algorithm authoring platforms and languages.

Abstract Objective To review and evaluate available software tools for electronic health record–driven phenotype authoring in order to identify gaps and needs for future development. Materials and Methods Candidate phenotype authoring tools were identified through (1) literature search in four publication databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus) and (2) a web search. A collection of tools was compiled and reviewed after the searches. A survey was designed and distributed to the developers of the reviewed tools to discover their functionalities and features. Results Twenty-four different phenotype authoring tools were identified and reviewed. Developers of 16 of these identified tools completed the evaluation survey (67% response rate). The surveyed tools showed commonalities but also varied in their capabilities in algorithm representation, logic functions, data support and software extensibility, search functions, user interface, and data outputs. Discussion Positive trends identified in the evaluation included: algorithms can be represented in both computable and human readable formats; and most tools offer a web interface for easy access. However, issues were also identified: many tools were lacking advanced logic functions for authoring complex algorithms; the ability to construct queries that leveraged un-structured data was not widely implemented; and many tools had limited support for plug-ins or external analytic software. Conclusions Existing phenotype authoring tools could enable clinical researchers to work with electronic health record data more efficiently, but gaps still exist in terms of the functionalities of such tools. The present work can serve as a reference point for the future development of similar tools.