ArticleResearch square2024
Application of Spatial Analysis for Electronic Health Records: Characterizing Patient Phenotypes and Emerging Trends.
Article in Research square, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Electronic health records (EHR) commonly contain patient addresses that provide valuable data for geocoding and spatial analysis, enabling more comprehensive descriptions of individual patients for clinical purposes. Despite the widespread use of EHR in clinical decision support and interventions, no systematic review has examined the extent to which spatial analysis is used to characterize patient phenotypes. Objective: This study reviews advanced spatial analyses that employed individual-level health data from EHR within the US to characterize patient phenotypes. Methods: We systematically evaluated English-language peer-reviewed articles from PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases from inception to August 20, 2023, without imposing constraints on time, study design, or specific health domains. Results: Only 49 articles met the eligibility criteria. These articles utilized diverse spatial methods, with a predominant focus on clustering techniques, while spatiotemporal analysis (frequentist and Bayesian) and modeling were relatively underexplored. A noteworthy surge (n = 42, 85.7%) in publications was observed post-2017. The publications investigated a variety of adult and pediatric clinical areas, including infectious disease, endocrinology, and cardiology, using phenotypes defined over a range of data domains, such as demographics, diagnoses, and visits. The primary health outcomes investigated were asthma, hypertension, and diabetes. Notably, patient phenotypes involving genomics, imaging, and notes were rarely utilized. Conclusions: This review underscores the growing interest in spatial analysis of EHR-derived data and highlights knowledge gaps in clinical health, phenotype domains, and spatial methodologies. Additionally, this review proposes guidelines for harnessing the potential of spatial analysis to enhance the context of individual patients for future clinical decision support.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.