Generalizability and portability of natural language processing system to extract individual social risk factors.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to validate and report on portability and generalizability of a Natural Language Processing (NLP) method to extract individual social factors from clinical notes, which was originally developed at a different institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A rule-based deterministic state machine NLP model was developed to extract financial insecurity and housing instability using notes from one institution and was applied on all notes written during 6 months at another institution. 10% of positively-classified notes by NLP and the same number of negatively-classified notes were manually annotated. The NLP model was adjusted to accommodate notes at the new site. Accuracy, positive predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity were calculated. RESULTS: More than 6 million notes were processed at the receiving site by the NLP model, which resulted in about 13,000 and 19,000 classified as positive for financial insecurity and housing instability, respectively. The NLP model showed excellent performance on the validation dataset with all measures over 0.87 for both social factors. DISCUSSION: Our study illustrated the need to accommodate institution-specific note-writing templates as well as clinical terminology of emergent diseases when applying NLP model for social factors. A state machine is relatively simple to port effectively across institutions. Our study. showed superior performance to similar generalizability studies for extracting social factors. CONCLUSION: Rule-based NLP model to extract social factors from clinical notes showed strong portability and generalizability across organizationally and geographically distinct institutions. With only relatively simple modifications, we obtained promising performance from an NLP-based model.

Understanding Health Care Administrators' Data and Information Needs for Decision Making during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study at an Academic Health System.

Objective. The COVID-19 pandemic created an unprecedented strain on the health care system, and administrators had to make many critical decisions to respond appropriately. This study sought to understand how health care administrators used data and information for decision making during the first 6 mo of the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and Methods. We conducted semistructured interviews with administrators across University of Florida (UF) Health. We performed an inductive thematic analysis of the transcripts. Results. Four themes emerged from the interviews: 1) common types of health systems or hospital operations data; 2) public health and other external data sources; 3) data interaction, integration, and exchange; and 4) novelty and evolution in data, information, or tools used over time. Participants illustrated the organizational, public health, and regional information they considered essential (e.g., hospital census, community positivity rate, etc.). Participants named specific challenges they faced due to data quality and timeliness. Participants elaborated on the necessity of data integration, validation, and coordination across different boundaries (e.g., different hospital systems in the same metro areas, public health agencies at the local, state, and federal level, etc.). Participants indicated that even within the first 6 mo of the COVID-19 pandemic, the data and tools used for making critical decisions changed. Discussion. While existing medical informatics infrastructure can facilitate decision making in pandemic response, data may not always be readily available in a usable format. Interoperable infrastructure and data standardization across multiple health systems would help provide more reliable and timely information for decision making. Conclusion. Our findings contribute to future discussions of improving data infrastructure and developing harmonized data standards needed to facilitate critical decisions at multiple health care system levels. Highlights: The study revealed common health systems or hospital operations data and information used in decision making during the first 6 mo of the COVID-19 pandemic.Participants described commonly used internal data sources, such as resource and financial reports and dashboards, and external data sources, such as federal, state, and local public health data.Participants described challenges including poor timeliness and limited local relevance of external data as well as poor integration of data sources within and across organizational boundaries.Results suggest the need for continued integration and standardization of health data to support health care administrative decision making during pandemics or other emergencies.

Assessment of structured data elements for social risk factors.

OBJECTIVES: Computable social risk factor phenotypes derived from routinely collected structured electronic health record (EHR) or health information exchange (HIE) data may represent a feasible and robust approach to measuring social factors. This study convened an expert panel to identify and assess the quality of individual EHR and HIE structured data elements that could be used as components in future computable social risk factor phenotypes. STUDY DESIGN: Technical expert panel. METHODS: A 2-round Delphi technique included 17 experts with an in-depth knowledge of available EHR and/or HIE data. The first-round identification sessions followed a nominal group approach to generate candidate data elements that may relate to socioeconomics, cultural context, social relationships, and community context. In the second-round survey, panelists rated each data element according to overall data quality and likelihood of systematic differences in quality across populations (ie, bias). RESULTS: Panelists identified a total of 89 structured data elements. About half of the data elements (n = 45) were related to socioeconomic characteristics. The panelists identified a diverse set of data elements. Elements used in reimbursement-related processes were generally rated as higher quality. Panelists noted that several data elements may be subject to implicit bias or reflect biased systems of care, which may limit their utility in measuring social factors. CONCLUSIONS: Routinely collected structured data within EHR and HIE systems may reflect patient social risk factors. Identifying and assessing available data elements serves as a foundational step toward developing future computable social factor phenotypes.