Back

Real-World Evidence BRIDGE: a tool to connect protocol with code programming

Cid Royo, A.; Elbers, R.; Weibel, D.; Hoxhaj, V.; Kurkcuoglu, Z.; Sturkenboom, M. C.; Vaz, T. A.; Andaur Navarro, C. L.

2024-05-08 health informatics
10.1101/2024.05.08.24306833 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveO_ST_ABSMethodsC_ST_ABSSeveral statistical analysis plans (SAP) from the Vaccine Monitoring Collaboration for Europe (VAC4EU) were analyzed to identify the study design sections and specifications for programming RWE studies based on multi-databases standardized to common data models. We envisioned a metadata schema that transforms the epidemiologists knowledge into a machine-readable format. This machine-readable metadata schema must also contain the different study sections, code lists, and time anchoring specified in the SAPs. Further desired attributes are adaptability and user-friendliness. ResultsWe developed RWE-BRIDGE, a metadata schema with a star-schema model divided into four study design sections with 12 tables: Study Variable Definition with two tables, Cohort Definition with two tables, Post-Exposure Outcome Analysis with one table, and Data Retrieval with seven tables. We provide examples and a step-by-step guide to populate this metadata schema. In addition, we provide a Shiny app that checks the several tables proposed in this metadata strategy. RWE-BRIDGE is available at https://github.com/UMC-Utrecht-RWE/RWE-BRIDGE. DiscussionThe RWE-BRIDGE has been designed to support the translation of study design sections from statistical analysis plans into analytical pipelines, facilitating collaboration and transparency between lead researchers and scientific programmers and reducing hard coding and repetition. This metadata schema strategy is flexible by supporting different common data models and programming languages, and it is adaptable to the specific needs of each SAP by adding further tables or fields, if necessary. Modified versions of the RWE-BRIGE have been applied in several RWE studies within the VAC4EU ecosystem. ConclusionThe RWE-BRIDGE offers a systematic approach to detailing what type of variables, time anchoring, and algorithms are required for a specific RWE study. Applying this metadata schema can facilitate the communication between epidemiologists and programmers in a transparent manner.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BMC Medical Research Methodology
43 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
26.3%
2
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
12.7%
3
JAMIA Open
37 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.9%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 31%
4.9%
5
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
4.9%
50% of probability mass above
6
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 6%
3.6%
7
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
45 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.6%
8
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.6%
9
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.6%
10
European Journal of Epidemiology
40 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
11
International Journal of Medical Informatics
25 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.9%
12
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
13
Research Synthesis Methods
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
14
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.7%
15
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
16
GigaScience
172 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
17
JMIR Medical Informatics
17 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
18
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 58%
1.0%
19
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
20
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
21
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 70%
0.9%
22
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
13 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
23
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
24
Informatics in Medicine Unlocked
21 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
25
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
26
Scientific Data
174 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
27
Journal of Public Health
23 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
28
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
29
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety
13 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
30
DIGITAL HEALTH
12 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.5%