Publication:
Use of the i2b2 research query tool to conduct a matched case-control clinical research study: Advantages, disadvantages and methodological considerations

dc.contributor.authorEmilie K. Johnsonen_US
dc.contributor.authorSarabeth Broder-Fingerten_US
dc.contributor.authorPornthep Tanpowpongen_US
dc.contributor.authorJonathan Bickelen_US
dc.contributor.authorJenifer R. Lightdaleen_US
dc.contributor.authorCaleb P. Nelsonen_US
dc.contributor.otherChildren's Hospital Bostonen_US
dc.contributor.otherHarvard-wide Pediatric Health Services Research Fellowshipen_US
dc.contributor.otherMassachusetts General Hospitalen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-09T02:41:25Z
dc.date.available2018-11-09T02:41:25Z
dc.date.issued2014-01-30en_US
dc.description.abstractBackground: A major aim of the i2b2 (informatics for integrating biology and the bedside) clinical data informatics framework aims to create an efficient structure within which patients can be identified for clinical and translational research projects. Our objective was to describe the respective roles of the i2b2 research query tool and the electronic medical record (EMR) in conducting a case-controlled clinical study at our institution. Methods. We analyzed the process of using i2b2 and the EMR together to generate a complete research database for a case-control study that sought to examine risk factors for kidney stones among gastrostomy tube (G-tube) fed children. Results: Our final case cohort consisted of 41/177 (23%) of potential cases initially identified by i2b2, who were matched with 80/486 (17%) of potential controls. Cases were 10 times more likely to be excluded for inaccurate coding regarding stones vs. inaccurate coding regarding G-tubes. A majority (67%) of cases were excluded due to not meeting clinical inclusion criteria, whereas a majority of control exclusions (72%) occurred due to inadequate clinical data necessary for study completion. Full dataset assembly required complementary information from i2b2 and the EMR. Conclusions: i2b2 was critical as a query analysis tool for patient identification in our case-control study. Patient identification via procedural coding appeared more accurate compared with diagnosis coding. Completion of our investigation required iterative interplay of i2b2 and the EMR to assemble the study cohort. © 2014 Johnson et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.en_US
dc.identifier.citationBMC Medical Research Methodology. Vol.14, No.1 (2014)en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/1471-2288-14-16en_US
dc.identifier.issn14712288en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-84893159699en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/34313
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84893159699&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleUse of the i2b2 research query tool to conduct a matched case-control clinical research study: Advantages, disadvantages and methodological considerationsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84893159699&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections