MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405615638 · doi:10.2196/60917

Conversion of Sensitive Data to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model: Protocol for the Development and Use of Carrot

2024· article· en· W4405615638 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sam Cox, Erum Masood, Vasiliki Panagi, C. M. Macdonald, Gordon Milligan, Scott Horban, Roberto Santos, Christopher Hall, Daniel Lea, Simon Tarr, Shahzad Mumtaz, Emeka Akashili, A P Rae, Esmond Urwin, Christian Cole, Aziz Sheikh, Emily Jefferson, Philip Quinlan

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilDepartment of Health and Social Care
KeywordsPreprintObservational studyGeneral partnershipProtocol (science)Computer scienceData scienceMedicineWorld Wide WebBusinessAlternative medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The use of data standards is low across the health care system, and converting data to a common data model (CDM) is usually required to undertake international research. One such model is the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) CDM. It has gained substantial traction across researchers and those who have developed data platforms. The Observational Health Care Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) partnership manages OMOP and provides many open-source tools to assist in converting data to the OMOP CDM. The challenge, however, is in the skills, knowledge, know-how, and capacity within teams to convert their data to OMOP. The European Health Care Data Evidence Network provided funds to allow data owners to bring in external resources to do the required conversions. The Carrot software (University of Nottingham) is a new set of open-source tools designed to help address these challenges while not requiring data access by external resources. OBJECTIVE: The use of data protection rules is increasing, and privacy by design is a core principle under the European and UK legislations related to data protection. Our aims for the Carrot software were to have a standardized mechanism for managing the data curation process, capturing the rules used to convert the data, and creating a platform that can reuse rules across projects to drive standardization of process and improve the speed without compromising on quality. Most importantly, we aimed to deliver this design-by-privacy approach without requiring data access to those creating the rules. METHODS: The software was developed using Agile approaches by both software engineers and data engineers, who would ultimately use the system. Experts in OMOP were used to ensure the approaches were correct. An incremental release program was initiated to ensure we delivered continuous progress. RESULTS: Carrot has been delivered and used on a project called COVID-Curated and Open Analysis and Research Platform (CO-CONNECT) to assist in the process of allowing datasets to be discovered via a federated platform. It has been used to create over 45,000 rules, and over 5 million patient records have been converted. This has been achieved while maintaining our principle of not allowing access to the underlying data by the team creating the rules. It has also facilitated the reuse of existing rules, with most rules being reused rather than manually curated. CONCLUSIONS: Carrot has demonstrated how it can be used alongside existing OHDSI tools with a focus on the mapping stage. The COVID-Curated and Open Analysis and Research Platform project successfully managed to reuse rules across datasets. The approach is valid and brings the benefits expected, with future work continuing to optimize the generation of rules. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/60917.

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)0.226
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.309
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.774
Threshold uncertainty score0.955

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2260.309
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0080.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0050.008
Research integrity0.0080.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0790.027

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 head0.974
GPT teacher head0.780
Teacher spread0.194 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreProtocol

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicEthics in Clinical Research→French-language works237,207→