Advancing the Use of Longitudinal Electronic Health Records: Tutorial for Uncovering Real-World Evidence in Chronic Disease Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Managing chronic diseases requires ongoing monitoring of disease activity and therapeutic responses to optimize treatment plans. With the growing availability of disease-modifying therapies, it is crucial to investigate comparative effectiveness and long-term outcomes beyond those available from randomized clinical trials. We introduce a comprehensive pipeline for generating reproducible and generalizable real-world evidence on disease outcomes by leveraging electronic health record data. The pipeline first generates scalable disease outcomes by linking electronic health record data with registry data containing a small sample of labeled outcomes. It then applies causal analysis using these scalable outcomes to evaluate therapies for chronic diseases. The implementation of the pipeline is illustrated in a case study based on multiple sclerosis. Our approach addresses challenges in real-world evidence generation for disease activity of chronic conditions, specifically the lack of direct observations on key outcomes and biases arising from imperfect or incomplete data. We present advanced machine learning techniques such as semisupervised and ensemble methods to impute missing outcome data, further incorporating steps for calibrated causal analyses and bias correction.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".