Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Guiding Principles for Data Sharing and Harmonization: Results of a Systematic Review and Modified Delphi From the Society of Critical Care Medicine Data Science Campaign
5
Zitationen
26
Autoren
2025
Jahr
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to establish a set of guiding principles for data sharing and harmonization in critical care, focusing on the use of real-world data (RWD) and real-world evidence (RWE) to improve patient outcomes and research efficacy. The principles were developed through a systematic literature review and a modified Delphi process, with the goal of enhancing data accessibility, standardization, and interoperability across critical care settings. DATA SOURCES: Data sources included a comprehensive search of peer-reviewed literature, specifically studies related to the use of RWD and RWE in healthcare, guidelines, best practices, and recommendations on data sharing and harmonization. A total of 8150 articles were initially identified through databases such as MEDLINE and Web of Science, with 257 studies meeting inclusion criteria. STUDY SELECTION: Inclusion criteria focused on publications discussing health-related informatics, recommendations for RWD/RWE usage, data sharing, and harmonization principles. Exclusion criteria ruled out non-human studies, case studies, conference abstracts, and articles published before 2013, as well as those not available in English. DATA EXTRACTION: From the 257 selected studies, 322 statements were extracted. After removing irrelevant definitions and off-topic content, 232 statements underwent content validation and thematic analysis. These statements were then consolidated into 24 candidate guiding principles after rigorous review and consensus-building among the expert panel. DATA SYNTHESIS: A three-phase modified Delphi process was employed, involving a conceptualization group, a review group, and a Delphi group. In phase 1, experts identified key themes and search terms for the systematic review. Phase 2 involved validating and refining the prospective guiding principles, while phase 3 employed a Delphi panel to rate principles on acceptability, importance, and feasibility. This process resulted in 24 guiding principles, with high consensus achieved in rounds 2 and 3 on their relevance and applicability. CONCLUSIONS: The systematic review and Delphi process resulted in 24 guiding principles to improve data sharing and harmonization in critical care. These principles address challenges across the data lifecycle, including generation, storage, access, and usage of RWD and RWE. This framework is designed to promote more effective and equitable data practices, with relevance for the development of artificial intelligence-based decision support tools and clinical research. The principles are intended to guide the responsible use of data science in critical care, with emphasis on ethics and equity, while acknowledging the variability of resources across settings.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Machine Learning in Medicine
2019 · 3.818 Zit.
Systematic Review: Impact of Health Information Technology on Quality, Efficiency, and Costs of Medical Care
2006 · 3.176 Zit.
Effects of Computerized Clinical Decision Support Systems on Practitioner Performance and Patient Outcomes
2005 · 2.972 Zit.
Studies in health technology and informatics
2008 · 2.903 Zit.
An overview of clinical decision support systems: benefits, risks, and strategies for success
2020 · 2.743 Zit.
Autoren
- Donna Lee Armaignac
- Smith F. Heavner
- Michelle Rausen
- Xiaohan Tanner Zhang
- Tamara Al-Hakim
- Yulia Levites Strekalova
- Neel Shah
- Kenneth E. Remy
- Sean T. Manion
- Melissa Haendel
- Andrew A. Kramer
- Elizabeth Scruth
- Teresa Rincon
- Soojin Park
- Laura Evans
- Tezcan Ozrazgat‐Baslanti
- Vitaly Herasevich
- Krzysztof Laudański
- David J. Murphy
- Heidi J. Engel
- Andrea Sikora
- Ashish K. Khanna
- Jerry J. Zimmerman
- Karin Reuter‐Rice
- J. Perren Cobb
- Gilles Clermont
Institutionen
- Baptist Health South Florida(US)
- University of South Carolina(US)
- Critical Path Institute(US)
- Clemson University(US)
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center(US)
- Johns Hopkins University(US)
- Johns Hopkins Medicine(US)
- Society of Critical Care Medicine(US)
- Florida Department of Health(US)
- University of Florida Health(US)
- Washington University in St. Louis(US)
- University Hospitals of Cleveland(US)
- Rainbow Babies & Children's Hospital(US)
- University School(US)
- Mind Science Foundation(US)
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill(US)
- Dermatology Consulting Services(US)
- Kaiser Foundation Hospital(US)
- Kaiser Foundation Hospital(US)
- Regis College(US)
- University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School(US)
- Green Circle(CZ)
- Presbyterian Hospital(US)
- Columbia University(US)
- University of Washington(US)
- University of Florida(US)
- Mayo Clinic in Arizona(US)
- Emory University(US)
- University of California San Francisco Medical Center(US)
- Georgia College & State University(US)
- University of Georgia(US)
- Augusta University(US)
- Augusta University Health(US)
- Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist(US)
- Outcomes Research Consortium(US)
- Seattle Children's Hospital(US)
- Duke University(US)
- Keck Hospital of USC(US)
- University of Pittsburgh(US)
- University of Pittsburgh Medical Center(US)