9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Current Applications and Future Directions for the CDISC Operational Data Model Standard: A Methodological Review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          In order to further advance research and development on the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC) Operational Data Model (ODM) standard, the existing research must be well understood. This paper presents a methodological review of the ODM literature. Specifically, it develops a classification schema to categorize the ODM literature according to how the standard has been applied within the clinical research data lifecycle. This paper suggests areas for future research and development that address ODM’s limitations and capitalize on its strengths to support new trends in clinical research informatics.

          Methods

          A systematic scan of the following databases was performed: (1) ABI/Inform, (2) ACM Digital, (3) AIS eLibrary, (4) Europe Central PubMed, (5) Google Scholar, (5) IEEE Xplore, (7) PubMed, and (8) ScienceDirect. A Web of Science citation analysis was also performed. The search term used on all databases was “CDISC ODM.” The two primary inclusion criteria were: (1) the research must examine the use of ODM as an information system solution component, or (2) the research must critically evaluate ODM against a stated solution usage scenario. Out of 2,686 articles identified, 266 were included in a title level review, resulting in 183 articles. An abstract review followed, resulting in 121 remaining articles; and after a full text scan 69 articles met the inclusion criteria.

          Results

          As the demand for interoperability has increased, ODM has shown remarkable flexibility and has been extended to cover a broad range of data and metadata requirements that reach well beyond ODM’s original use cases. This flexibility has yielded research literature that covers a diverse array of topic areas. A classification schema reflecting the use of ODM within the clinical research data lifecycle was created to provide a categorized and consolidated view of the ODM literature. The elements of the framework include: (1) EDC (Electronic Data Capture) and EHR (Electronic Health Record) infrastructure; (2) planning; (3) data collection; (4) data tabulations and analysis; and (5) study archival. The analysis reviews the strengths and limitations of ODM as a solution component within each section of the classification schema. This paper also identifies opportunities for future ODM research and development, including improved mechanisms for semantic alignment with external terminologies, better representation of the CDISC standards used end-to-end across the clinical research data lifecycle, improved support for real-time data exchange, the use of EHRs for research, and the inclusion of a complete study design.

          Conclusions

          ODM is being used in ways not originally anticipated, and covers a diverse array of use cases across the clinical research data lifecycle. ODM has been used as much as a study metadata standard as it has for data exchange. A significant portion of the literature addresses integrating EHR and clinical research data. The simplicity and readability of ODM has likely contributed to its success and broad implementation as a data and metadata standard. Keeping the core ODM model focused on the most fundamental use cases, while using extensions to handle edge cases, has kept the standard easy for developers to learn and use.

          Graphical Abstract

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Contributors
          Journal
          100970413
          22289
          J Biomed Inform
          J Biomed Inform
          Journal of biomedical informatics
          1532-0464
          1532-0480
          13 March 2016
          02 March 2016
          April 2016
          01 April 2017
          : 60
          : 352-362
          Affiliations
          [a ]Dakota State University, College of Business and Information Systems, 820 N Washington Ave, Madison, SD 57042
          [b ]FH Joanneum University of Applied Sciences, Eggenberger Allee 11, 8020 Graz, Austria
          [c ]Lister Hill National Center for Biomedical Communications, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, 8600 Rockville Pike, Bld 38a, Rm 9N919, Bethesda, MD 20894
          Author notes
          [* ]Corresponding author: Sam Hume, swhume@ 123456gmail.com , Dakota State University, College of Business and Information Systems, 820 N Washington Ave, Madison, SD 57042, (tel) +1-484-354-0873
          Article
          PMC4837012 PMC4837012 4837012 nihpa765126
          10.1016/j.jbi.2016.02.016
          4837012
          26944737
          c6b554cb-b6c3-452c-b4c1-3441e437d5b3
          History
          Categories
          Article

          EHR,ODM,Define-XML,CDISC,interoperability,clinical trial
          EHR, ODM, Define-XML, CDISC, interoperability, clinical trial

          Comments

          Comment on this article

          scite_
          0
          0
          0
          0
          Smart Citations
          0
          0
          0
          0
          Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
          View Citations

          See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

          scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

          Similar content121

          Cited by19