Display options
Share it on

JMIR Med Inform. 2015 Jul 10;3(3):e26. doi: 10.2196/medinform.4221.

Building Data-Driven Pathways From Routinely Collected Hospital Data: A Case Study on Prostate Cancer.

JMIR medical informatics

Joao H Bettencourt-Silva, Jeremy Clark, Colin S Cooper, Robert Mills, Victor J Rayward-Smith, Beatriz de la Iglesia

Affiliations

  1. School of Computing Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom. [email protected].

PMID: 26162314 PMCID: PMC4526987 DOI: 10.2196/medinform.4221

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Routinely collected data in hospitals is complex, typically heterogeneous, and scattered across multiple Hospital Information Systems (HIS). This big data, created as a byproduct of health care activities, has the potential to provide a better understanding of diseases, unearth hidden patterns, and improve services and cost. The extent and uses of such data rely on its quality, which is not consistently checked, nor fully understood. Nevertheless, using routine data for the construction of data-driven clinical pathways, describing processes and trends, is a key topic receiving increasing attention in the literature. Traditional algorithms do not cope well with unstructured processes or data, and do not produce clinically meaningful visualizations. Supporting systems that provide additional information, context, and quality assurance inspection are needed.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to explore how routine hospital data can be used to develop data-driven pathways that describe the journeys that patients take through care, and their potential uses in biomedical research; it proposes a framework for the construction, quality assessment, and visualization of patient pathways for clinical studies and decision support using a case study on prostate cancer.

METHODS: Data pertaining to prostate cancer patients were extracted from a large UK hospital from eight different HIS, validated, and complemented with information from the local cancer registry. Data-driven pathways were built for each of the 1904 patients and an expert knowledge base, containing rules on the prostate cancer biomarker, was used to assess the completeness and utility of the pathways for a specific clinical study. Software components were built to provide meaningful visualizations for the constructed pathways.

RESULTS: The proposed framework and pathway formalism enable the summarization, visualization, and querying of complex patient-centric clinical information, as well as the computation of quality indicators and dimensions. A novel graphical representation of the pathways allows the synthesis of such information.

CONCLUSIONS: Clinical pathways built from routinely collected hospital data can unearth information about patients and diseases that may otherwise be unavailable or overlooked in hospitals. Data-driven clinical pathways allow for heterogeneous data (ie, semistructured and unstructured data) to be collated over a unified data model and for data quality dimensions to be assessed. This work has enabled further research on prostate cancer and its biomarkers, and on the development and application of methods to mine, compare, analyze, and visualize pathways constructed from routine data. This is an important development for the reuse of big data in hospitals.

Keywords: clinical pathways; data quality; data summarization; electronic medical records; hospital information systems; prostate cancer; visualization

References

  1. Methods Inf Med. 2012;51(3):210-20 - PubMed
  2. J Biomed Inform. 2001 Aug;34(4):285-98 - PubMed
  3. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2015 Mar;22(2):263-74 - PubMed
  4. J Biomed Inform. 2014 Oct;51:24-34 - PubMed
  5. Int J Med Inform. 2009 Apr;78 Suppl 1:S77-85 - PubMed
  6. Int J Med Inform. 2008 Jan;77(1):41-9 - PubMed
  7. Ann Intern Med. 1995 Dec 15;123(12):941-8 - PubMed
  8. J Biomed Inform. 2007 Jun;40(3):252-69 - PubMed
  9. BJU Int. 2011 Sep;108(6):806-13 - PubMed
  10. Lancet Oncol. 2008 May;9(5):445-52 - PubMed
  11. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2015 Mar;22(2):330-9 - PubMed
  12. Artif Intell Med. 2012 Sep;56(1):35-50 - PubMed
  13. Int J Med Inform. 2006 Mar-Apr;75(3-4):240-5 - PubMed
  14. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2008;136:573-8 - PubMed
  15. Artif Intell Med. 2002 Sep-Oct;26(1-2):1-24 - PubMed
  16. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014 Nov-Dec;21(6):1038-44 - PubMed
  17. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013 Jan 1;20(1):144-51 - PubMed
  18. Methods Inf Med. 2012;51(4):281-94 - PubMed
  19. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2008;136:229-34 - PubMed
  20. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2010 Mar-Apr;17(2):124-30 - PubMed
  21. Int J Med Inform. 2013 Jan;82(1):10-24 - PubMed
  22. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2015 Sep;22(5):938-47 - PubMed
  23. Int J Med Inform. 2009 Aug;78(8):543-50 - PubMed
  24. J Urol. 2006 Dec;176(6 Pt 2):S6-S10; quiz S3-5 - PubMed
  25. BMJ. 2009 Sep 24;339:b3537 - PubMed

Publication Types