JMIR Medical Informatics (Oct 2021)

Common Data Elements for Meaningful Stroke Documentation in Routine Care and Clinical Research: Retrospective Data Analysis

  • Sarah Berenspöhler,
  • Jens Minnerup,
  • Martin Dugas,
  • Julian Varghese

DOI
https://doi.org/10.2196/27396
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 9, no. 10
p. e27396

Abstract

Read online

BackgroundMedical information management for stroke patients is currently a very time-consuming endeavor. There are clear guidelines and procedures to treat patients having acute stroke, but it is not known how well these established practices are reflected in patient documentation. ObjectiveThis study compares a variety of documentation processes regarding stroke. The main objective of this work is to provide an overview of the most commonly occurring medical concepts in stroke documentation and identify overlaps between different documentation contexts to allow for the definition of a core data set that could be used in potential data interfaces. MethodsMedical source documentation forms from different documentation contexts, including hospitals, clinical trials, registries, and international standards, regarding stroke treatment followed by rehabilitation were digitized in the operational data model. Each source data element was semantically annotated using the Unified Medical Language System. The concept codes were analyzed for semantic overlaps. A concept was considered common if it appeared in at least two documentation contexts. The resulting common concepts were extended with implementation details, including data types and permissible values based on frequent patterns of source data elements, using an established expert-based and semiautomatic approach. ResultsIn total, 3287 data elements were identified, and 1051 of these emerged as unique medical concepts. The 100 most frequent medical concepts cover 9.51% (100/1051) of all concept occurrences in stroke documentation, and the 50 most frequent concepts cover 4.75% (50/1051). A list of common data elements was implemented in different standardized machine-readable formats on a public metadata repository for interoperable reuse. ConclusionsStandardization of medical documentation is a prerequisite for data exchange as well as the transferability and reuse of data. In the long run, standardization would save time and money and extend the capabilities for which such data could be used. In the context of this work, a lack of standardization was observed regarding current information management. Free-form text fields and intricate questions complicate automated data access and transfer between institutions. This work also revealed the potential of a unified documentation process as a core data set of the 50 most frequent common data elements, accounting for 34% of the documentation in medical information management. Such a data set offers a starting point for standardized and interoperable data collection in routine care, quality management, and clinical research.