Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25123747›Full record

ReviewYearbook of medical informatics2014

Information technology for clinical, translational and comparative effectiveness research. Findings from the section clinical research informatics.

C Daniel, R Choquet

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Yearbook of medical informatics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

C Daniel
R Choquet

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo select and summarize key contributions to current research in the field of Clinical Research Informatics (CRI).

methodA bibliographic search using a combination of MeSH and free terms search over PubMed was performed followed by a blinded review.

resultsThe review process resulted in the selection of four papers illustrating various aspects of current research efforts in the area of CRI. The first paper tackles the challenge of extracting accurate phenotypes from Electronic Healthcare Records (EHRs). Privacy protection within shared de-identified, patient-level research databases is the focus of the second selected paper. Two other papers exemplify the growing role of formal representation of clinical data - in metadata repositories - and knowledge - in ontologies - for supporting the process of reusing data for clinical research.

conclusionsThe selected articles demonstrate how concrete platforms are currently achieving interoperability across clinical research and care domains and have reached the evaluation phase. When EHRs linked to genetic data have the potential to shift the research focus from research driven patient recruitment to phenotyping in large population, a key issue is to lower patient re-identification risks for biomedical research databases. Current research illustrates the potential of knowledge engineering to support, in the coming years, the scientific lifecycle of clinical research.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchElectronic Health RecordsMedical InformaticsComparative Effectiveness ResearchHumansTranslational Research, BiomedicalBiomedical ResearchClinical researchInternational Medical Informatics AssociationMedical informaticsNursing ResearchPatient SelectionPharmacovigilancePhenotypingyearbook

Identifiers

PMID25123747
PMCPMC4287061

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.