Measuring Quality of Healthcare Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes from Routine Data: a Seven-nation Survey Conducted by the IMIA Primary Health Care Working Group.

Background: The Institute of Medicine framework defines six dimensions of quality for healthcare systems: (1) safety, (2) effectiveness, (3) patient centeredness, (4) timeliness of care, (5) efficiency, and (6) equity. Large health datasets provide an opportunity to assess quality in these areas. Objective: To perform an international comparison of the measurability of the delivery of these aims, in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) from large datasets. Method: We conducted a survey to assess healthcare outcomes data quality of existing databases and disseminated this through professional networks. We examined the data sources used to collect the data, frequency of data uploads, and data types used for identifying people with T2DM. We compared data completeness across the six areas of healthcare quality, using selected measures pertinent to T2DM management. Results: We received 14 responses from seven countries (Australia, Canada, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Turkey and the UK). Most databases reported frequent data uploads and would be capable of near real time analysis of healthcare quality.The majority of recorded data related to safety (particularly medication adverse events) and treatment efficacy (glycaemic control and microvascular disease). Data potentially measuring equity was less well recorded. Recording levels were lowest for patient-centred care, timeliness of care, and system efficiency, with the majority of databases containing no data in these areas. Databases using primary care sources had higher data quality across all areas measured. Conclusion: Data quality could be improved particularly in the areas of patient-centred care, timeliness, and efficiency. Primary care derived datasets may be most suited to healthcare quality assessment.

Big Data Usage Patterns in the Health Care Domain: A Use Case Driven Approach Applied to the Assessment of Vaccination Benefits and Risks. Contribution of the IMIA Primary Healthcare Working Group.

BACKGROUND: Generally benefits and risks of vaccines can be determined from studies carried out as part of regulatory compliance, followed by surveillance of routine data; however there are some rarer and more long term events that require new methods. Big data generated by increasingly affordable personalised computing, and from pervasive computing devices is rapidly growing and low cost, high volume, cloud computing makes the processing of these data inexpensive. OBJECTIVE: To describe how big data and related analytical methods might be applied to assess the benefits and risks of vaccines. METHOD: We reviewed the literature on the use of big data to improve health, applied to generic vaccine use cases, that illustrate benefits and risks of vaccination. We defined a use case as the interaction between a user and an information system to achieve a goal. We used flu vaccination and pre-school childhood immunisation as exemplars. RESULTS: We reviewed three big data use cases relevant to assessing vaccine benefits and risks: (i) Big data processing using crowdsourcing, distributed big data processing, and predictive analytics, (ii) Data integration from heterogeneous big data sources, e.g. the increasing range of devices in the "internet of things", and (iii) Real-time monitoring for the direct monitoring of epidemics as well as vaccine effects via social media and other data sources. CONCLUSIONS: Big data raises new ethical dilemmas, though its analysis methods can bring complementary real-time capabilities for monitoring epidemics and assessing vaccine benefit-risk balance.

The Evidence-base for Using Ontologies and Semantic Integration Methodologies to Support Integrated Chronic Disease Management in Primary and Ambulatory Care: Realist Review. Contribution of the IMIA Primary Health Care Informatics WG.

BACKGROUND: Most chronic diseases are managed in primary and ambulatory care. The chronic care model (CCM) suggests a wide range of community, technological, team and patient factors contribute to effective chronic disease management. Ontologies have the capability to enable formalised linkage of heterogeneous data sources as might be found across the elements of the CCM. OBJECTIVE: To describe the evidence base for using ontologies and other semantic integration methods to support chronic disease management. METHOD: We reviewed the evidence-base for the use of ontologies and other semantic integration methods within and across the elements of the CCM. We report them using a realist review describing the context in which the mechanism was applied, and any outcome measures. RESULTS: Most evidence was descriptive with an almost complete absence of empirical research and important gaps in the evidence-base. We found some use of ontologies and semantic integration methods for community support of the medical home and for care in the community. Ubiquitous information technology (IT) and other IT tools were deployed to support self-management support, use of shared registries, health behavioural models and knowledge discovery tools to improve delivery system design. Data quality issues restricted the use of clinical data; however there was an increased use of interoperable data and health system integration. CONCLUSIONS: Ontologies and semantic integration methods are emergent with limited evidence-base for their implementation. However, they have the potential to integrate the disparate community wide data sources to provide the information necessary for effective chronic disease management.