Assessing the Use of German Claims Data Vocabularies for Research in the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model: Development and Evaluation Study.

Background: National classifications and terminologies already routinely used for documentation within patient care settings enable the unambiguous representation of clinical information. However, the diversity of different vocabularies across health care institutions and countries is a barrier to achieving semantic interoperability and exchanging data across sites. The Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM) enables the standardization of structure and medical terminology. It allows the mapping of national vocabularies into so-called standard concepts, representing normative expressions for international analyses and research. Within our project "Hybrid Quality Indicators Using Machine Learning Methods" (Hybrid-QI), we aim to harmonize source codes used in German claims data vocabularies that are currently unavailable in the OMOP CDM. Objective: This study aims to increase the coverage of German vocabularies in the OMOP CDM. We aim to completely transform the source codes used in German claims data into the OMOP CDM without data loss and make German claims data usable for OMOP CDM-based research. Methods: To prepare the missing German vocabularies for the OMOP CDM, we defined a vocabulary preparation approach consisting of the identification of all codes of the corresponding vocabularies, their assembly into machine-readable tables, and the translation of German designations into English. Furthermore, we used 2 proposed approaches for OMOP-compliant vocabulary preparation: the mapping to standard concepts using the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) tool Usagi and the preparation of new 2-billion concepts (ie, concept_id >2 billion). Finally, we evaluated the prepared vocabularies regarding completeness and correctness using synthetic German claims data and calculated the coverage of German claims data vocabularies in the OMOP CDM. Results: Our vocabulary preparation approach was able to map 3 missing German vocabularies to standard concepts and prepare 8 vocabularies as new 2-billion concepts. The completeness evaluation showed that the prepared vocabularies cover 44.3% (3288/7417) of the source codes contained in German claims data. The correctness evaluation revealed that the specified validity periods in the OMOP CDM are compliant for the majority (705,531/706,032, 99.9%) of source codes and associated dates in German claims data. The calculation of the vocabulary coverage showed a noticeable decrease of missing vocabularies from 55% (11/20) to 10% (2/20) due to our preparation approach. Conclusions: By preparing 10 vocabularies, we showed that our approach is applicable to any type of vocabulary used in a source data set. The prepared vocabularies are currently limited to German vocabularies, which can only be used in national OMOP CDM research projects, because the mapping of new 2-billion concepts to standard concepts is missing. To participate in international OHDSI network studies with German claims data, future work is required to map the prepared 2-billion concepts to standard concepts.

European Health Data & Evidence Network-learnings from building out a standardized international health data network.

OBJECTIVE: Health data standardized to a common data model (CDM) simplifies and facilitates research. This study examines the factors that make standardizing observational health data to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) CDM successful. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-five data partners (DPs) from 11 countries received funding from the European Health Data Evidence Network (EHDEN) to standardize their data. Three surveys, DataQualityDashboard results, and statistics from the conversion process were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively. Our measures of success were the total number of days to transform source data into the OMOP CDM and participation in network research. RESULTS: The health data converted to CDM represented more than 133 million patients. 100%, 88%, and 84% of DPs took Surveys 1, 2, and 3. The median duration of the 6 key extract, transform, and load (ETL) processes ranged from 4 to 115 days. Of the 25 DPs, 21 DPs were considered applicable for analysis of which 52% standardized their data on time, and 48% participated in an international collaborative study. DISCUSSION: This study shows that the consistent workflow used by EHDEN proves appropriate to support the successful standardization of observational data across Europe. Over the 25 successful transformations, we confirmed that getting the right people for the ETL is critical and vocabulary mapping requires specific expertise and support of tools. Additionally, we learned that teams that proactively prepared for data governance issues were able to avoid considerable delays improving their ability to finish on time. CONCLUSION: This study provides guidance for future DPs to standardize to the OMOP CDM and participate in distributed networks. We demonstrate that the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics community must continue to evaluate and provide guidance and support for what ultimately develops the backbone of how community members generate evidence.

Transforming and evaluating the UK Biobank to the OMOP Common Data Model for COVID-19 research and beyond.

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has demonstrated the value of real-world data for public health research. International federated analyses are crucial for informing policy makers. Common data models (CDMs) are critical for enabling these studies to be performed efficiently. Our objective was to convert the UK Biobank, a study of 500 000 participants with rich genetic and phenotypic data to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) CDM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We converted UK Biobank data to OMOP CDM v. 5.3. We transformedparticipant research data on diseases collected at recruitment and electronic health records (EHRs) from primary care, hospitalizations, cancer registrations, and mortality from providers in England, Scotland, and Wales. We performed syntactic and semantic validations and compared comorbidities and risk factors between source and transformed data. RESULTS: We identified 502 505 participants (3086 with COVID-19) and transformed 690 fields (1 373 239 555 rows) to the OMOP CDM using 8 different controlled clinical terminologies and bespoke mappings. Specifically, we transformed self-reported noncancer illnesses 946 053 (83.91% of all source entries), cancers 37 802 (70.81%), medications 1 218 935 (88.25%), and prescriptions 864 788 (86.96%). In EHR, we transformed 13 028 182 (99.95%) hospital diagnoses, 6 465 399 (89.2%) procedures, 337 896 333 primary care diagnoses (CTV3, SNOMED-CT), 139 966 587 (98.74%) prescriptions (dm+d) and 77 127 (99.95%) deaths (ICD-10). We observed good concordance across demographic, risk factor, and comorbidity factors between source and transformed data. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that the OMOP CDM can be successfully leveraged to harmonize complex large-scale biobanked studies combining rich multimodal phenotypic data. Our study uncovered several challenges when transforming data from questionnaires to the OMOP CDM which require further research. The transformed UK Biobank resource is a valuable tool that can enable federated research, like COVID-19 studies.

Evaluation and Challenges of Medical Procedure Data Harmonization to SNOMED-CT for Observational Research.

The relevance of health data research on real world data (RWD) is increasing. To prepare national RWD for international research, harmonization with standard terminologies is required. In this paper, we evaluate to what extent the German OPS vocabulary in OHDSI covers codes present in RWD and mappings to SNOMED-CT. The evaluation identified a mapping gap of 21.1% in the RWD set.