A consensus diabetes core dataset for research using NHS data: outputs from a Diabetes Data Science Catalyst workshop
Young, K. G.; Banerjee, A.; Dayan, C.; Denaxas, S.; Eastwood, S. V.; Jeffery, A.; Rutter, M. K.; Sattar, N.; Valabhji, J.; Horswood, R.; Humphreys, R.; Molete, M.; Murray, K.; Rogers, P.; Veiro, D.; Ireland, H.; Walker, C.; Shields, B. M.; Pearson, E. R.; McGovern, A. P.; Dennis, J. M.
Show abstract
Aims To develop a 'core' dataset of diabetes related variables to support reproducible research using UK routinely collected health data. Methods A workshop was conducted bringing together diabetes healthcare professionals, researchers, and patient and public representatives to discuss and prioritise variables for inclusion in the Diabetes Core Dataset. Core variables were those considered to be highest priority for diabetes research and available at high quality in NHS data routinely used for research (primary care [GP] and Hospital Episode Statistics [HES] data). Candidate variables for inclusion in the Diabetes Core Dataset were from a review of existing core datasets and expert opinion. Participants scored variables anonymously based on priority for diabetes research. Results 25 variables from existing diabetes core datasets and 87 other candidate variables were considered for inclusion in the Diabetes Core Dataset. All 25 of those from existing diabetes core datasets and 5 of the 87 candidate variables met the core requirements for inclusion. In addition, 7 variables were identified as high priority but not included in the core dataset as they are not currently available in GP/HES data; these were labelled as 'future high priority' variables for diabetes research. Conclusions A new diabetes core dataset for UK EHR research has been developed using a consensus-based process. The core dataset is openly available and can be flexibly applied in UK EHR (https://healthdatagateway.org/en/tool/426), including in new NHS Research Secure Data Environment platforms, to enhance reproducible research to improve the clinical care of people with diabetes and associated conditions.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- The iDiabetes Platform: Enhanced Phenotyping of Patients with Diabetes for Precision Diagnosis, Prognosis and Treatment- study protocol for a cluster-randomised controlled study 95%
- Replicating a COVID-19 study in a national England database to assess the generalisability of research with regional electronic health record data 94%
- Determining the feasibility of calculating pancreatic cancer risk scores for people with new-onset diabetes in primary care (DEFEND PRIME): study protocol 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Home monitoring of HbA1c in diabetes mellitus: A protocol for systematic review and narrative synthesis on reliability, accuracy, and patient acceptability 91%
- Patient characteristics associated with clinically coded long COVID: an OpenSAFELY study using electronic health records 90%
- A mixed-methods evaluation of patients’ views on primary care multi-disciplinary teams in Scotland 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Rates of serious clinical outcomes in survivors of hospitalisation with COVID-19: a descriptive cohort study within the OpenSAFELY platform 88%
- TRACKing Excess Deaths (TRACKED): an interactive online tool to monitor excess deaths associated with COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom 87%
- Improving modelling for epidemic responses: reflections from members of the UK infectious disease modelling community on their experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic 86%
Similar papers in this journal
- The challenges of replication: a worked example of methods reproducibility using routinely collected healthcare data 93%
- ChatGPT- versus human-generated answers to frequently asked questions about diabetes: a Turing test-inspired survey among employees of a Danish diabetes center 91%
- Engaging communities through participatory learning action for the control and prevention of diabetes: a protocol for the Process Evaluation of the EMPOWER-D trial in Pakistan and Afghanistan 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Is the quality of hospital EHR data sufficient to evidence its ICHOM outcomes performance in heart failure? A pilot evaluation 89%
- Can we trust the prediction model? Demonstrating the importance of external validation by investigating the COVID-19 Vulnerability (C-19) Index across an international network of observational healthcare datasets 89%
- Developing and Evaluating Mappings of ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM Codes to PheCodes 88%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.