Published in

Oxford University Press, JAMIA: A Scholarly Journal of Informatics in Health and Biomedicine, 4(29), p. 609-618, 2021

DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocab217

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Synergies between centralized and federated approaches to data quality: a report from the national COVID cohort collaborative

Journal article published in 2021 by Emily R. Pfaff, James von Oehsen, Andrew T. Girvin, Davera L. Gabriel, Kristin Kostka, Michele Morris, Matvey B. Palchuk, Harold P. Lehmann, Mark Bissell, Katie R. Bradwell ORCID, Sigfried Gold, Stephanie S. Hong, Johanna Loomba, Amin Manna, Julie A. McMurry and other authors.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Abstract Objective In response to COVID-19, the informatics community united to aggregate as much clinical data as possible to characterize this new disease and reduce its impact through collaborative analytics. The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) is now the largest publicly available HIPAA limited dataset in US history with over 6.4 million patients and is a testament to a partnership of over 100 organizations. Materials and Methods We developed a pipeline for ingesting, harmonizing, and centralizing data from 56 contributing data partners using 4 federated Common Data Models. N3C data quality (DQ) review involves both automated and manual procedures. In the process, several DQ heuristics were discovered in our centralized context, both within the pipeline and during downstream project-based analysis. Feedback to the sites led to many local and centralized DQ improvements. Results Beyond well-recognized DQ findings, we discovered 15 heuristics relating to source Common Data Model conformance, demographics, COVID tests, conditions, encounters, measurements, observations, coding completeness, and fitness for use. Of 56 sites, 37 sites (66%) demonstrated issues through these heuristics. These 37 sites demonstrated improvement after receiving feedback. Discussion We encountered site-to-site differences in DQ which would have been challenging to discover using federated checks alone. We have demonstrated that centralized DQ benchmarking reveals unique opportunities for DQ improvement that will support improved research analytics locally and in aggregate. Conclusion By combining rapid, continual assessment of DQ with a large volume of multisite data, it is possible to support more nuanced scientific questions with the scale and rigor that they require.