From Planning Stage Towards FAIR Data: A Practical Metadatasheet For Biomedical Scientists.

Datasets consist of measurement data and metadata. Metadata provides context, essential for understanding and (re-)using data. Various metadata standards exist for different methods, systems and contexts. However, relevant information resides at differing stages across the data-lifecycle. Often, this information is defined and standardized only at publication stage, which can lead to data loss and workload increase. In this study, we developed Metadatasheet, a metadata standard based on interviews with members of two biomedical consortia and systematic screening of data repositories. It aligns with the data-lifecycle allowing synchronous metadata recording within Microsoft Excel, a widespread data recording software. Additionally, we provide an implementation, the Metadata Workbook, that offers user-friendly features like automation, dynamic adaption, metadata integrity checks, and export options for various metadata standards. By design and due to its extensive documentation, the proposed metadata standard simplifies recording and structuring of metadata for biomedical scientists, promoting practicality and convenience in data management. This framework can accelerate scientific progress by enhancing collaboration and knowledge transfer throughout the intermediate steps of data creation.

The accuracy of race & ethnicity data in US based healthcare databases: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The availability and accuracy of data on a patient's race/ethnicity varies across databases. Discrepancies in data quality can negatively impact attempts to study health disparities. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to organize information on the accuracy of race/ethnicity data stratified by database type and by specific race/ethnicity categories. RESULTS: The review included 43 studies. Disease registries showed consistently high levels of data completeness and accuracy. EHRs frequently showed incomplete and/or inaccurate data on the race/ethnicity of patients. Databases had high levels of accurate data for White and Black patients but relatively high levels of misclassification and incomplete data for Hispanic/Latinx patients. Asians, Pacific Islanders, and AI/ANs are the most misclassified. Systems-based interventions to increase self-reported data showed improvement in data quality. CONCLUSION: Data on race/ethnicity that is collected with the purpose of research and quality improvement appears most reliable. Data accuracy can vary by race/ethnicity status and better collection standards are needed.

Gobernanza en salud digital en la era de COVID-19

La aceleración en la digitalización de las actividades sociales, producto de la pandemia de coronavirus, presentan un reto importante para los países latinoamericanos. En el caso particular de la salud, las estrategias de salud digital como la telesalud / telemedicina han tenido un incremento importante como alternativa para apoyar el acceso a la atención primaria en salud en algunos países de la región, no contando en algunos casos con el marco de gobernanza (Marcos legales, normativos y estratégicos) necesario para su implementación y su sostenibilidad en el tiempo.

Toward Better Data Dashboards for US Drug Value Assessments.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the use of data dashboards to convey information about a drug's value, and reduce the need to collapse dimensions of value to a single measure. METHODS: Review of the literature on US Drug Value Assessment Frameworks, and discussion of the value of data dashboards to improve the manner in which information on value is displayed. RESULTS: The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year ratio is a useful starting point for conversation about a drug's value, but it cannot reflect all of the elements of value about which different audiences care deeply. Data dashboards for drug value assessments can draw from other contexts. Decision makers should be presented with well-designed value dashboards containing various metrics, including conventional cost per quality-adjusted life-year ratios as well as measures of a drug's impact on clinical and patient-centric outcomes, and on budgetary and distributional consequences, to convey a drug's value along different dimensions. CONCLUSIONS: The advent of US drug value frameworks in health care has forced a concomitant effort to develop appropriate information displays. Researchers should formally test different formats and elements.

Evaluation of reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in patients with COVID-19 using the CONSORT statement.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding patients with COVID-19 and analyse the influence factors. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library databases were searched to collect RCTs regarding patients with COVID-19. The retrieval time was from the inception to December 1, 2020. The CONSORT 2010 statement was used to evaluate the overall reporting quality of these RCTs. RESULTS: 53 RCTs were included. The study showed that the average reporting rate for 37 items in CONSORT checklist was 53.85% with mean overall adherence score of 13.02±3.546 (ranged: 7 to 22). The multivariate linear regression analysis showed the overall adherence score to the CONSORT guideline was associated with journal impact factor (P = 0.006), and endorsement of CONSORT statement (P = 0.014). CONCLUSION: Although many RCTs of COVID-19 have been published in different journals, the overall reporting quality of these articles was suboptimal, it can not provide valid evidence for clinical decision-making and systematic reviews. Therefore, more journals should endorse the CONSORT statement, authors should strictly follow the relevant provisions of the CONSORT guideline when reporting articles. Future RCTs should particularly focus on improvement of detailed reporting in allocation concealment, blinding and estimation of sample size.

Ensuring trust in COVID-19 data: A retrospective cohort study.

ABSTRACT: There are no standardized methods for collecting and reporting coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) data. We aimed to compare the proportion of patients admitted for COVID-19-related symptoms and those admitted for other reasons who incidentally tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).Retrospective cohort studyData were sampled twice weekly between March 26 and June 6, 2020 from a "COVID-19 dashboard," a system-wide administrative database that includes the number of hospitalized patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test. Patient charts were subsequently reviewed and the principal reason for hospitalization abstracted.Data collected during a statewide lockdown revealed that 92 hospitalized patients had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. Among these individuals, 4.3% were hospitalized for reasons other than COVID-19-related symptoms but were incidentally found to be SARS-CoV-2-positive. After the lockdown was suspended, the total inpatient census of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients increased to 128, 20.3% of whom were hospitalized for non-COVID-19-related complaints.In the absence of a statewide lockdown, there was a significant increase in the proportion of patients admitted for non-COVID-19-related complaints who were incidentally found to be SARS-CoV-2-positive. In order to ensure data integrity, coding should distinguish between patients with COVID-19-related symptoms and asymptomatic patients carrying the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

EUAdb: A resource for COVID-19 test development and comparison.

Due to the sheer number of COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) cases there is a need for increased world-wide SARS-CoV-2 testing capability that is both efficient and effective. Having open and easy access to detailed information about these tests, their sensitivity, the types of samples they use, etc. would be highly useful to ensure their reproducibility, to help clients compare and decide which tests would be best suited for their applications, and to avoid costs of reinventing similar or identical tests. Additionally, this resource would provide a means of comparing the many innovative diagnostic tools that are currently being developed in order to provide a foundation of technologies and methods for the rapid development and deployment of tests for future emerging diseases. Such a resource might thus help to avert the delays in testing and screening that was observed in the early stages of the pandemic and plausibly led to more COVID-19-related deaths than necessary. We aim to address these needs via a relational database containing standardized ontology and curated data about COVID-19 diagnostic tests that have been granted Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) by the FDA (US Food and Drug Administration). Simple queries of this actively growing database demonstrate considerable variation among these tests with respect to sensitivity (limits of detection, LoD), controls and targets used, criteria used for calling results, sample types, reagents and instruments, and quality and amount of information provided.

The methodological quality of 176,620 randomized controlled trials published between 1966 and 2018 reveals a positive trend but also an urgent need for improvement.

Many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are biased and difficult to reproduce due to methodological flaws and poor reporting. There is increasing attention for responsible research practices and implementation of reporting guidelines, but whether these efforts have improved the methodological quality of RCTs (e.g., lower risk of bias) is unknown. We, therefore, mapped risk-of-bias trends over time in RCT publications in relation to journal and author characteristics. Meta-information of 176,620 RCTs published between 1966 and 2018 was extracted. The risk-of-bias probability (random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of patients/personnel, and blinding of outcome assessment) was assessed using a risk-of-bias machine learning tool. This tool was simultaneously validated using 63,327 human risk-of-bias assessments obtained from 17,394 RCTs evaluated in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). Moreover, RCT registration and CONSORT Statement reporting were assessed using automated searches. Publication characteristics included the number of authors, journal impact factor (JIF), and medical discipline. The annual number of published RCTs substantially increased over 4 decades, accompanied by increases in authors (5.2 to 7.8) and institutions (2.9 to 4.8). The risk of bias remained present in most RCTs but decreased over time for allocation concealment (63% to 51%), random sequence generation (57% to 36%), and blinding of outcome assessment (58% to 52%). Trial registration (37% to 47%) and the use of the CONSORT Statement (1% to 20%) also rapidly increased. In journals with a higher impact factor (>10), the risk of bias was consistently lower with higher levels of RCT registration and the use of the CONSORT Statement. Automated risk-of-bias predictions had accuracies above 70% for allocation concealment (70.7%), random sequence generation (72.1%), and blinding of patients/personnel (79.8%), but not for blinding of outcome assessment (62.7%). In conclusion, the likelihood of bias in RCTs has generally decreased over the last decades. This optimistic trend may be driven by increased knowledge augmented by mandatory trial registration and more stringent reporting guidelines and journal requirements. Nevertheless, relatively high probabilities of bias remain, particularly in journals with lower impact factors. This emphasizes that further improvement of RCT registration, conduct, and reporting is still urgently needed.

Defining treatment regimens and lines of therapy using real-world data in oncology.

Retrospective observational research relies on databases that do not routinely record lines of therapy or reasons for treatment change. Standardized approaches to estimate lines of therapy were developed and evaluated in this study. A number of rules were developed, assumptions varied and macros developed to apply to large datasets. Results were investigated in an iterative process to refine line of therapy algorithms in three different cancers (lung, colorectal and gastric). Three primary factors were evaluated and included in the estimation of lines of therapy in oncology: defining a treatment regimen, addition/removal of drugs and gap periods. Algorithms and associated Statistical Analysis Software (SAS®) macros for line of therapy identification are provided to facilitate and standardize the use of real-world databases for oncology research.

Lay abstract Most, if not all, real-world healthcare databases do not contain data explaining treatment changes, requiring that rules be applied to estimate when treatment changes may reflect advancement of underlying disease. This study investigated three tumor types (lung, colorectal and gastric cancer) to develop and provide rules that researchers can apply to real-world databases. The resulting algorithms and associated SAS^® macros from this work are provided for use in the Supplementary data.

A Framework for National Collaboration to Reduce Documentation Burden and Design for Usable and Reusable Data.

A focused effort is needed to capture the utility and usability of the electronic health record for providing usable and reusable data while reducing documentation burden. A collaborative effort of nurse leaders and experts was able to generate national consensus recommendations on documentation elements related to admission history. The process used in this effort is summarized in a framework that can be used by other groups to develop content that reduces documentation burden while maximizing the creation of usable and reusable data.

Critical Steps in Data Management During a Crisis.

Data management is essential in a flow cytometry (FCM) shared resource laboratory (SRL) for the integrity of collected data and its long-term preservation, as described in the Cytometry publication from 2016, ISAC Flow Cytometry Shared Resource Laboratory (SRL) Best Practices (Barsky et al.: Cytometry Part A 89A(2016): 1017-1030). The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic introduced an array of challenges in the operation of SRLs. The subsequent laboratory shutdowns and access restrictions brought to the forefront well-established practices that withstood the impact of a sudden change in operations and illuminated areas that need improvement. The most significant challenges from a data management perspective were data access for remote analysis and workstation management. Notably, lessons learned from this challenge emphasize the importance of safeguarding collected data from loss in various emergencies such as fire or natural disasters where the physical hardware storing data could be directly affected. Here, we describe two data management systems that have been successful during the current emergency created by the pandemic, specifically remote access and automated data transfer. We will discuss other situations that could arise and lead to data loss or challenges in interpreting data. © 2020 International Society for Advancement of Cytometry.

Reporting and design of randomized controlled trials for COVID-19: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has mobilized global research at an unprecedented scale. While challenges associated with the COVID-19 trial landscape have been discussed previously, no comprehensive reviews have been conducted to assess the reporting, design, and data sharing practices of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). PURPOSE: The purpose of this review was to gain insight into the current landscape of reporting, methodological design, and data sharing practices for COVID-19 RCTs. DATA SOURCES: We conducted three searches to identify registered clinical trials, peer-reviewed publications, and pre-print publications. STUDY SELECTION: After screening eight major trial registries and 7844 records, we identified 178 registered trials and 38 publications describing 35 trials, including 25 peer-reviewed publications and 13 pre-prints. DATA EXTRACTION: Trial ID, registry, location, population, intervention, control, study design, recruitment target, actual recruitment, outcomes, data sharing statement, and time of data sharing were extracted. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 178 registered trials, 112 (62.92%) were in hospital settings, median planned recruitment was 100 participants (IQR: 60, 168), and the majority (n = 166, 93.26%) did not report results in their respective registries. Of 35 published trials, 31 (88.57%) were in hospital settings, median actual recruitment was 86 participants (IQR: 55.5, 218), 10 (28.57%) did not reach recruitment targets, and 27 trials (77.14%) reported plans to share data. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of our study highlight limitations in the design and reporting practices of COVID-19 RCTs and provide guidance towards more efficient reporting of trial results, greater diversity in patient settings, and more robust data sharing.

Determinants of improved data consistency across routine immunization data tools for health facilities in Kano State, Nigeria.

INTRODUCTION: in this study, determinants of improved data consistency for routine immunization information at health facilities was measured to identify associated factors. METHODS: between June and August 2015, 1055 HFs were visited across 44 Local Government Areas in Kano state. We assessed data consistency, frequency of supportive supervision visits, availability of trained staff and attendance to monthly LGA RI review meetings. We compared RI monthly summary forms (MSF) versus national health management information system summary form (NHMIS) and vaccine management form 1a (VM1a) versus HF vaccine utilization summary monthly summary (HFVUM) for consistency. Data consistency at HF was determined at <+10% between number of children reportedly immunized, and doses of vaccine opened using 3 antigens (BCG, Penta and Measles). Levels of discrepancy <10% were considered as good data consistency. Bivariate and multivariate analysis used to determine association. RESULTS: data Consistency was observed in 195 (18.5%) HFs between (MSF vs NHMIS) and 90 (8.5%) HFs between (VM1a vs HFVUM). Consistency between MSF vs NHMIS was associated with receiving one or more SS visits in the previous month (p=0.001), data collection tools availability (p=0.001), recent attendance to monthly LGA RI review meeting and availability of trained staff. Data consistency between VM1a form and the HF VU summary was associated with a recent documented SS visit (p=0.05) and availability of trained staff (p=0.05). CONCLUSION: low level of data consistency was observed in Kano. Enhanced SS visits and availability of trained staff are associated with improved data quality.

Roadmap discussions Final

Caribbean countries prepare a roadmap for the implementation of Information Systems for Health (IS4H) in the Caribbean Region.

Sistemas de Información para la Salud (IS4H)

July 2018 - Bogota, Colombia. Presentation of the IS4H Initiative in the South America region.

EURL ECVAM Genotoxicity and Carcinogenicity Database of Substances Eliciting Negative Results in the Ames Test: Construction of the Database.

The bacterial reverse mutation test (Ames test) is the most commonly used genotoxicity test; it is a primary component of the chemical safety assessment data required by regulatory agencies worldwide. Within the current accepted in vitro genotoxicity test battery, it is considered capable of revealing DNA reactivity, and identifying substances that can produce gene mutations via different mechanisms. The previously published consolidated EURL ECVAM Genotoxicity and Carcinogenicity Database, which includes substances that elicited a positive response in the Ames test, constitutes a collection of data that serves as a reference for a number of regulatory activities in the area of genotoxicity testing. Consequently, we considered it important to expand the database to include substances that fail to elicit a positive response in the Ames test, i.e., Ames negative substances. Here, we describe a curated collection of 211 Ames negative substances, with a summary of complementary data available for other genotoxicity endpoints in vitro and in vivo, plus available carcinogenicity data. A descriptive analysis of the data is presented. This includes a representation of the chemical space formed by the Ames-negative database with respect to other substances (e.g. REACH registered substances, approved drugs, pesticides, etc.) and a description of the organic functional groups found in the database. We also provide some suggestions on further analyses that could be made.