MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399931228 · doi:10.2196/58541

Bridging Data Models in Health Care With a Novel Intermediate Query Format for Feasibility Queries: Mixed Methods Study

2024· article· en· W4399931228 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lorenz Rosenau, Julian Gruendner, Alexander Kiel, Thomas Köhler, Bastian Schäffer, Raphael W. Majeed

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintComputer scienceBridging (networking)Information retrievalDatabaseData scienceData miningWorld Wide WebComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: To advance research with clinical data, it is essential to make access to the available data as fast and easy as possible for researchers, which is especially challenging for data from different source systems within and across institutions. Over the years, many research repositories and data standards have been created. One of these is the Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) standard, used by the German Medical Informatics Initiative (MII) to harmonize and standardize data across university hospitals in Germany. One of the first steps to make these data available is to allow researchers to create feasibility queries to determine the data availability for a specific research question. Given the heterogeneity of different query languages to access different data across and even within standards such as FHIR (eg, CQL and FHIR Search), creating an intermediate query syntax for feasibility queries reduces the complexity of query translation and improves interoperability across different research repositories and query languages. Objective: This study describes the creation and implementation of an intermediate query syntax for feasibility queries and how it integrates into the federated German health research portal (Forschungsdatenportal Gesundheit) and the MII. Methods: We analyzed the requirements for feasibility queries and the feasibility tools that are currently available in research repositories. Based on this analysis, we developed an intermediate query syntax that can be easily translated into different research repository-specific query languages. Results: The resulting Clinical Cohort Definition Language (CCDL) for feasibility queries combines inclusion criteria in a conjunctive normal form and exclusion criteria in a disjunctive normal form, allowing for additional filters like time or numerical restrictions. The inclusion and exclusion results are combined via an expression to specify feasibility queries. We defined a JSON schema for the CCDL, generated an ontology, and demonstrated the use and translatability of the CCDL across multiple studies and real-world use cases. Conclusions: We developed and evaluated a structured query syntax for feasibility queries and demonstrated its use in a real-world example as part of a research platform across 39 German university hospitals.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.279
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.446
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.279
Threshold uncertainty score0.890

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2790.446
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.006
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0040.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.173
GPT teacher head0.555
Teacher spread0.382 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207