Objectives To evaluate the utility of applying the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM) across multiple observational databases within an organization and to apply standardized analytics tools for conducting observational research.Materials and methods Six deidentified patient-level datasets were transformed to the OMOP CDM. We evaluated the extent of information loss that occurred through the standardization process. We developed a standardized analytic tool to replicate the cohort construction process from a published epidemiology protocol and applied the analysis to all 6 databases to assess time-to-execution and comparability of results.Results Transformation to the CDM resulted in minimal information loss across all 6 databases. Patients and observations excluded were due to identified data quality issues in the source system, 96% to 99% of condition records and 90% to 99% of drug records were successfully mapped into the CDM using the standard vocabulary. The full cohort replication and descriptive baseline summary was executed for 2 cohorts in 6 databases in less than 1 hour.Discussion The standardization process improved data quality, increased efficiency, and facilitated cross-database comparisons to support a more systematic approach to observational research. Comparisons across data sources showed consistency in the impact of inclusion criteria, using the protocol and identified differences in patient characteristics and coding practices across databases.Conclusion Standardizing data structure (through a CDM), content (through a standard vocabulary with source code mappings), and analytics can enable an institution to apply a network-based approach to observational research across multiple, disparate observational health databases.

Objective To quantify the background incidence rates of 15 prespecified adverse events of special interest (AESIs) associated with covid-19 vaccines. Design Multinational network cohort study. Setting Electronic health records and health claims data from eight countries: Australia, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States, mapped to a common data model. Participants 126 661 070 people observed for at least 365 days before 1 January 2017, 2018, or 2019 from 13 databases. Main outcome measures Events of interests were 15 prespecified AESIs (non-haemorrhagic and haemorrhagic stroke, acute myocardial infarction, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, anaphylaxis, Bell’s palsy, myocarditis or pericarditis, narcolepsy, appendicitis, immune thrombocytopenia, disseminated intravascular coagulation, encephalomyelitis (including acute disseminated encephalomyelitis), Guillain-Barré syndrome, and transverse myelitis). Incidence rates of AESIs were stratified by age, sex, and database. Rates were pooled across databases using random effects meta-analyses and classified according to the frequency categories of the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences. Results Background rates varied greatly between databases. Deep vein thrombosis ranged from 387 (95% confidence interval 370 to 404) per 100 000 person years in UK CPRD GOLD data to 1443 (1416 to 1470) per 100 000 person years in US IBM MarketScan Multi-State Medicaid data among women aged 65 to 74 years. Some AESIs increased with age. For example, myocardial infarction rates in men increased from 28 (27 to 29) per 100 000 person years among those aged 18-34 years to 1400 (1374 to 1427) per 100 000 person years in those older than 85 years in US Optum electronic health record data. Other AESIs were more common in young people. For example, rates of anaphylaxis among boys and men were 78 (75 to 80) per 100 000 person years in those aged 6-17 years and 8 (6 to 10) per 100 000 person years in those older than 85 years in Optum electronic health record data. Meta-analytic estimates of AESI rates were classified according to age and sex. Conclusion This study found large variations in the observed rates of AESIs by age group and sex, showing the need for stratification or standardisation before using background rates for safety surveillance. Considerable population level heterogeneity in AESI rates was found between databases.

Summary Background Hydroxychloroquine, a drug commonly used in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, has received much negative publicity for adverse events associated with its authorisation for emergency use to treat patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. We studied the safety of hydroxychloroquine, alone and in combination with azithromycin, to determine the risk associated with its use in routine care in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Methods In this multinational, retrospective study, new user cohort studies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis aged 18 years or older and initiating hydroxychloroquine were compared with those initiating sulfasalazine and followed up over 30 days, with 16 severe adverse events studied. Self-controlled case series were done to further establish safety in wider populations, and included all users of hydroxychloroquine regardless of rheumatoid arthritis status or indication. Separately, severe adverse events associated with hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin (compared with hydroxychloroquine plus amoxicillin) were studied. Data comprised 14 sources of claims data or electronic medical records from Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Spain, the UK, and the USA. Propensity score stratification and calibration using negative control outcomes were used to address confounding. Cox models were fitted to estimate calibrated hazard ratios (HRs) according to drug use. Estimates were pooled where the I 2 value was less than 0·4. Findings The study included 956 374 users of hydroxychloroquine, 310 350 users of sulfasalazine, 323 122 users of hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin, and 351 956 users of hydroxychloroquine plus amoxicillin. No excess risk of severe adverse events was identified when 30-day hydroxychloroquine and sulfasalazine use were compared. Self-controlled case series confirmed these findings. However, long-term use of hydroxychloroquine appeared to be associated with increased cardiovascular mortality (calibrated HR 1·65 [95% CI 1·12–2·44]). Addition of azithromycin appeared to be associated with an increased risk of 30-day cardiovascular mortality (calibrated HR 2·19 [95% CI 1·22–3·95]), chest pain or angina (1·15 [1·05–1·26]), and heart failure (1·22 [1·02–1·45]). Interpretation Hydroxychloroquine treatment appears to have no increased risk in the short term among patients with rheumatoid arthritis, but in the long term it appears to be associated with excess cardiovascular mortality. The addition of azithromycin increases the risk of heart failure and cardiovascular mortality even in the short term. We call for careful consideration of the benefit–risk trade-off when counselling those on hydroxychloroquine treatment. Funding National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, NIHR Senior Research Fellowship programme, US National Institutes of Health, US Depar...

Objective Cohort definition is a bottleneck for conducting clinical research and depends on subjective decisions by domain experts. Data-driven cohort definition is appealing but requires substantial knowledge of terminologies and clinical data models. Criteria2Query is a natural language interface that facilitates human-computer collaboration for cohort definition and execution using clinical databases. Materials and Methods Criteria2Query uses a hybrid information extraction pipeline combining machine learning and rule-based methods to systematically parse eligibility criteria text, transforms it first into a structured criteria representation and next into sharable and executable clinical data queries represented as SQL queries conforming to the OMOP Common Data Model. Users can interactively review, refine, and execute queries in the ATLAS web application. To test effectiveness, we evaluated 125 criteria across different disease domains from ClinicalTrials.gov and 52 user-entered criteria. We evaluated F1 score and accuracy against 2 domain experts and calculated the average computation time for fully automated query formulation. We conducted an anonymous survey evaluating usability. Results Criteria2Query achieved 0.795 and 0.805 F1 score for entity recognition and relation extraction, respectively. Accuracies for negation detection, logic detection, entity normalization, and attribute normalization were 0.984, 0.864, 0.514 and 0.793, respectively. Fully automatic query formulation took 1.22 seconds/criterion. More than 80% (11+ of 13) of users would use Criteria2Query in their future cohort definition tasks. Conclusions We contribute a novel natural language interface to clinical databases. It is open source and supports fully automated and interactive modes for autonomous data-driven cohort definition by researchers with minimal human effort. We demonstrate its promising user friendliness and usability.

Comorbid conditions appear to be common among individuals hospitalised with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) but estimates of prevalence vary and little is known about the prior medication use of patients. Here, we describe the characteristics of adults hospitalised with COVID-19 and compare them with influenza patients. We include 34,128 (US: 8362, South Korea: 7341, Spain: 18,425) COVID-19 patients, summarising between 4811 and 11,643 unique aggregate characteristics. COVID-19 patients have been majority male in the US and Spain, but predominantly female in South Korea. Age profiles vary across data sources. Compared to 84,585 individuals hospitalised with influenza in 2014-19, COVID-19 patients have more typically been male, younger, and with fewer comorbidities and lower medication use. While protecting groups vulnerable to influenza is likely a useful starting point in the response to COVID-19, strategies will likely need to be broadened to reflect the particular characteristics of individuals being hospitalised with COVID-19.

Background Hydroxychloroquine has recently received Emergency Use Authorization by the FDA and is currently prescribed in combination with azithromycin for COVID-19 pneumonia. We studied the safety of hydroxychloroquine, alone and in combination with azithromycin.Methods New user cohort studies were conducted including 16 severe adverse events (SAEs).Rheumatoid arthritis patients aged 18+ and initiating hydroxychloroquine were compared to those initiating sulfasalazine and followed up over 30 days. Self-controlled case series (SCCS) were conducted to further establish safety in wider populations. Separately, SAEs associated with hydroxychloroquineazithromycin (compared to hydroxychloroquine-amoxicillin) were studied. Data comprised 14 sources of claims data or electronic medical records from Germany, Japan, Netherlands, Spain, UK, and USA.Propensity score stratification and calibration using negative control outcomes were used to address confounding. Cox models were fitted to estimate calibrated hazard ratios (CalHRs) according to drug use. Estimates were pooled where I2<40%. ResultsOverall, 956,374 and 310,350 users of hydroxychloroquine and sulfasalazine, and 323,122 and 351,956 users of hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine-amoxicillin were included.No excess risk of SAEs was identified when 30-day hydroxychloroquine and sulfasalazine use were compared. SCCS confirmed these findings. However, when azithromycin was added to hydroxychloroquine, we observed an increased risk of 30-day cardiovascular mortality (CalHR2.19 [1.22-3.94]), chest pain/angina (CalHR 1.15 [95% CI 1.05-1.26]), and heart failure (CalHR 1.22 [95% CI 1.02-1.45])

Background:The Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM) has been implemented on various claims and electronic health record (EHR) databases, but has not been applied to a hospital transactional database. This study addresses the implementation of the OMOP CDM on the U.S. Premier Hospital database.Methods:We designed and implemented an extract, transform, load (ETL) process to convert the Premier hospital database into the OMOP CDM. Standard charge codes in Premier were mapped between the OMOP version 4.0 Vocabulary and standard charge descriptions. Visit logic was added to impute the visit dates. We tested the conversion by replicating a published study using the raw and transformed databases. The Premier hospital database was compared to a claims database, in regard to prevalence of disease.Findings:The data transformed into the CDM resulted in 1% of the data being discarded due to data errors in the raw data. A total of 91.4% of Premier standard charge codes were mapped successfully to a standard vocabulary. The results of the replication study resulted in a similar distribution of patient characteristics. The comparison to the claims data yields notable similarities and differences amongst conditions represented in both databases.Discussion:The transformation of the Premier database into the OMOP CDM version 4.0 adds value in conducting analyses due to successful mapping of the drugs and procedures. The addition of visit logic gives ordinality to drugs and procedures that wasn’t present prior to the transformation. Comparing conditions in Premier against a claims database can provide an understanding about Premier’s potential use in pharmacoepidemiology studies that are traditionally conducted via claims databases.Conclusion and Next Steps:The conversion of the Premier database into the OMOP CDM 4.0 was completed successfully. The next steps include refinement of vocabularies and mappings and continual maintenance of the transformed CDM.

No abstract