Will the trilogue on the EU Data Protection Regulation recognise the importance of health research?

Ten Topics to Get Started in Medical Informatics Research

The vast and heterogeneous data being constantly generated in clinics can provide great wealth for patients and research alike. The quickly evolving field of medical informatics research has contributed numerous concepts, algorithms, and standards to facilitate this development. However, these difficult relationships, complex terminologies, and multiple implementations can present obstacles for people who want to get active in the field. With a particular focus on medical informatics research conducted in Germany, we present in our Viewpoint a set of 10 important topics to improve the overall interdisciplinary communication between different stakeholders (eg, physicians, computational experts, experimentalists, students, patient representatives). This may lower the barriers to entry and offer a starting point for collaborations at different levels. The suggested topics are briefly introduced, then general best practice guidance is given, and further resources for in-depth reading or hands-on tutorials are recommended. In addition, the topics are set to cover current aspects and open research gaps of the medical informatics domain, including data regulations and concepts; data harmonization and processing; and data evaluation, visualization, and dissemination. In addition, we give an example on how these topics can be integrated in a medical informatics curriculum for higher education. By recognizing these topics, readers will be able to (1) set clinical and research data into the context of medical informatics, understanding what is possible to achieve with data or how data should be handled in terms of data privacy and storage; (2) distinguish current interoperability standards and obtain first insights into the processes leading to effective data transfer and analysis; and (3) value the use of newly developed technical approaches to utilize the full potential of clinical data.

Quality, Usability, and Effectiveness of mHealth Apps and the Role of Artificial Intelligence: Current Scenario and Challenges

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) and big data in medicine has increased in recent years. Indeed, the use of AI in mobile health (mHealth) apps could considerably assist both individuals and health care professionals in the prevention and management of chronic diseases, in a person-centered manner. Nonetheless, there are several challenges that must be overcome to provide high-quality, usable, and effective mHealth apps. Here, we review the rationale and guidelines for the implementation of mHealth apps and the challenges regarding quality, usability, and user engagement and behavior change, with a special focus on the prevention and management of noncommunicable diseases. We suggest that a cocreation-based framework is the best method to address these challenges. Finally, we describe the current and future roles of AI in improving personalized medicine and provide recommendations for developing AI-based mHealth apps. We conclude that the implementation of AI and mHealth apps for routine clinical practice and remote health care will not be feasible until we overcome the main challenges regarding data privacy and security, quality assessment, and the reproducibility and uncertainty of AI results. Moreover, there is a lack of both standardized methods to measure the clinical outcomes of mHealth apps and techniques to encourage user engagement and behavior changes in the long term. We expect that in the near future, these obstacles will be overcome and that the ongoing European project, Watching the risk factors (WARIFA), will provide considerable advances in the implementation of AI-based mHealth apps for disease prevention and health promotion.

Contribution of Synthetic Data Generation towards an Improved Patient Stratification in Palliative Care

AI model development for synthetic data generation to improve Machine Learning (ML) methodologies is an integral part of research in Computer Science and is currently being transferred to related medical fields, such as Systems Medicine and Medical Informatics. In general, the idea of personalized decision-making support based on patient data has driven the motivation of researchers in the medical domain for more than a decade, but the overall sparsity and scarcity of data are still major limitations. This is in contrast to currently applied technology that allows us to generate and analyze patient data in diverse forms, such as tabular data on health records, medical images, genomics data, or even audio and video. One solution arising to overcome these data limitations in relation to medical records is the synthetic generation of tabular data based on real world data. Consequently, ML-assisted decision-support can be interpreted more conveniently, using more relevant patient data at hand. At a methodological level, several state-of-the-art ML algorithms generate and derive decisions from such data. However, there remain key issues that hinder a broad practical implementation in real-life clinical settings. In this review, we will give for the first time insights towards current perspectives and potential impacts of using synthetic data generation in palliative care screening because it is a challenging prime example of highly individualized, sparsely available patient information. Taken together, the reader will obtain initial starting points and suitable solutions relevant for generating and using synthetic data for ML-based screenings in palliative care and beyond.

Electronic Health Record-Triggered Research Infrastructure Combining Real-world Electronic Health Record Data and Patient-Reported Outcomes to Detect Benefits, Risks, and Impact of Medication: Development Study

Background

Real-world data from electronic health records (EHRs) represent a wealth of information for studying the benefits and risks of medical treatment. However, they are limited in scope and should be complemented by information from the patient perspective.

Objective

The aim of this study is to develop an innovative research infrastructure that combines information from EHRs with patient experiences reported in questionnaires to monitor the risks and benefits of medical treatment.

Methods

We focused on the treatment of overactive bladder (OAB) in general practice as a use case. To develop the Benefit, Risk, and Impact of Medication Monitor (BRIMM) infrastructure, we first performed a requirement analysis. BRIMM’s starting point is routinely recorded general practice EHR data that are sent to the Dutch Nivel Primary Care Database weekly. Patients with OAB were flagged weekly on the basis of diagnoses and prescriptions. They were invited subsequently for participation by their general practitioner (GP), via a trusted third party. Patients received a series of questionnaires on disease status, pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments, adverse drug reactions, drug adherence, and quality of life. The questionnaires and a dedicated feedback portal were developed in collaboration with a patient association for pelvic-related diseases, Bekkenbodem4All. Participating patients and GPs received feedback. An expert meeting was organized to assess the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of the new research infrastructure.

Results

The BRIMM infrastructure was developed and implemented. In the Nivel Primary Care Database, 2933 patients with OAB from 27 general practices were flagged. GPs selected 1636 (55.78%) patients who were eligible for the study, of whom 295 (18.0% of eligible patients) completed the first questionnaire. A total of 288 (97.6%) patients consented to the linkage of their questionnaire data with their EHR data. According to experts, the strengths of the infrastructure were the linkage of patient-reported outcomes with EHR data, comparison of pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments, flexibility of the infrastructure, and low registration burden for GPs. Methodological weaknesses, such as susceptibility to bias, patient selection, and low participation rates among GPs and patients, were seen as weaknesses and threats. Opportunities represent usefulness for policy makers and health professionals, conditional approval of medication, data linkage to other data sources, and feedback to patients.

Conclusions

The BRIMM research infrastructure has the potential to assess the benefits and safety of (medical) treatment in real-life situations using a unique combination of EHRs and patient-reported outcomes. As patient involvement is an important aspect of the treatment process, generating knowledge from clinical and patient perspectives is valuable for health care providers, patients, and policy makers. The developed methodology can easily be applied to other treatments and health problems.

Record linkage of population-based cohort data from minors with national register data: a scoping review and comparative legal analysis of four European countries

Background: The GDPR was implemented to build an overarching framework for personal data protection across the EU/EEA. Linkage of data directly collected from cohort participants, potentially serving as a prominent tool for health research, must respect data protection rules and privacy rights. Our objective was to investigate law possibilities of linking cohort data of minors with routinely collected education and health data comparing EU/EEA member states. Methods: A legal comparative analysis and scoping review was conducted of openly accessible published laws and regulations in EUR-Lex and national law databases on GDPR's implementation in Portugal, Finland, Norway, and the Netherlands and its connected national regulations purposing record linkage for health research that have been implemented up until April 30, 2021. Results: The GDPR does not ensure total uniformity in data protection legislation across member states offering flexibility for national legislation. Exceptions to process personal data, e.g., public interest and scientific research, must be laid down in EU/EEA or national law. Differences in national interpretation caused obstacles in cross-national research and record linkage: Portugal requires written consent and ethical approval; Finland allows linkage mostly without consent through the national Social and Health Data Permit Authority; Norway when based on regional ethics committee's approval and adequate information technology safeguarding confidentiality; the Netherlands mainly bases linkage on the opt-out system and Data Protection Impact Assessment. Conclusions: Though the GDPR is the most important legal framework, national legislation execution matters most when linking cohort data with routinely collected health and education data. As national interpretation varies, legal intervention balancing individual right to informational self-determination and public good is gravely needed for health research. More harmonization across EU/EEA could be helpful but should not be detrimental in those member states which already opened a leeway for registries and research for the public good without explicit consent.

Application of Bayesian networks to generate synthetic health data

OBJECTIVE

This study seeks to develop a fully automated method of generating synthetic data from a real dataset that could be employed by medical organizations to distribute health data to researchers, reducing the need for access to real data. We hypothesize the application of Bayesian networks will improve upon the predominant existing method, medBGAN, in handling the complexity and dimensionality of healthcare data.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We employed Bayesian networks to learn probabilistic graphical structures and simulated synthetic patient records from the learned structure. We used the University of California Irvine (UCI) heart disease and diabetes datasets as well as the MIMIC-III diagnoses database. We evaluated our method through statistical tests, machine learning tasks, preservation of rare events, disclosure risk, and the ability of a machine learning classifier to discriminate between the real and synthetic data.

RESULTS

Our Bayesian network model outperformed or equaled medBGAN in all key metrics. Notable improvement was achieved in capturing rare variables and preserving association rules.

DISCUSSION

Bayesian networks generated data sufficiently similar to the original data with minimal risk of disclosure, while offering additional transparency, computational efficiency, and capacity to handle more data types in comparison to existing methods. We hope this method will allow healthcare organizations to efficiently disseminate synthetic health data to researchers, enabling them to generate hypotheses and develop analytical tools.

CONCLUSION

We conclude the application of Bayesian networks is a promising option for generating realistic synthetic health data that preserves the features of the original data without compromising data privacy.

Setting the Foundations: Individual Rights, Public Interest, Scientific Research and Biobanking

The principle of conferral tames the EU competence to regulate research in a comprehensive manner, yet furthering research is one of its aspirations. Data protection, however, is an area within which the EU has legislated extensively. During the development of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), an important issue to tackle was how to balance the ambitious EU aspirations and differing stakeholder interests, on the one hand, with limited competences in research regulation, on the other, and how to determine the extent to which data protection could be used as a means to further scientific research in the EU legal order. The outcome is the GDPR multifaceted research regime that sets forth EU policy and opens up for further regulations from the Member States as well as the EU.

The research regime that the GDPR has created poses numerous questions. Key among these is, what are the implications of the operationalisation of Article 89 GDPR in biobanking? This chapter sets out some of the underlying tensions in the area and pins down key conceptual foundations for the book. It provides insights into the EU’s interests in the area of biobanking and maps out central elements of the research regime that has been built within the GDPR. Thereafter, it analyses the key concepts used in the book, including biobank and biobanking, scientific research as undertaken under the GDPR, individual rights and public interest. Lastly, it shares some preliminary reflections as starting points for the analysis to come.

Open health data: Mapping the ecosystem

BACKGROUND

Governments around the world own multiple datasets related to the policy domain of health. Datasets range from vaccination rates to the availability of health care practitioners in a region to the outcomes of certain surgeries. Health is believed to be a promising subject in the case of open government data policies. However, the specific properties of health data such as its sensibilities regarding privacy, ethics, and ownership encompass particular conditions either enabling or preventing datasets to become freely and easily accessible for everyone.

OBJECTIVE AND METHODS

This paper aims to map the ecosystem of open health data. By analyzing the foundations of health data and the commonalities of open data ecosystems via literature analysis, the socio-technical environment in which health data managed by governments are opened up or potentially stay closed is created. After its theoretical development, the open health data ecosystem is tested via a case study concerning the Data for Better Health initiative from the government of Belgium.

RESULTS

Creation and assessment of an open health data ecosystem consisting of stakeholders, interests, information policies, and data preparation activities.

CONCLUSIONS

The policy domain of health includes de-identification activities, bioethical assessments, and the specific role of data providers within its open data ecosystem. However, the concept of open data does not always fully apply to the topic of health. Such several health datasets may be findable via government portals but not directly accessible. Differentiation within types of health data and data user capacities are recommendable for future research.

Health Data for Research Through a Nationwide Privacy-Proof System in Belgium: Design and Implementation

Background

Health data collected during routine care have important potential for reuse for other purposes, especially as part of a learning health system to advance the quality of care. Many sources of bias have been identified through the lifecycle of health data that could compromise the scientific integrity of these data. New data protection legislation requires research facilities to improve safety measures and, thus, ensure privacy.

Objective

This study aims to address the question on how health data can be transferred from various sources and using multiple systems to a centralized platform, called Healthdata.be, while ensuring the accuracy, validity, safety, and privacy. In addition, the study demonstrates how these processes can be used in various research designs relevant for learning health systems.

Methods

The Healthdata.be platform urges uniformity of the data registration at the primary source through the use of detailed clinical models. Data retrieval and transfer are organized through end-to-end encrypted electronic health channels, and data are encoded using token keys. In addition, patient identifiers are pseudonymized so that health data from the same patient collected across various sources can still be linked without compromising the deidentification.

Results

The Healthdata.be platform currently collects data for >150 clinical registries in Belgium. We demonstrated how the data collection for the Belgian primary care morbidity register INTEGO is organized and how the Healthdata.be platform can be used for a cluster randomized trial.

Conclusions

Collecting health data in various sources and linking these data to a single patient is a promising feature that can potentially address important concerns on the validity and quality of health data. Safe methods of data transfer without compromising privacy are capable of transporting these data from the primary data provider or clinician to a research facility. More research is required to demonstrate that these methods improve the quality of data collection, allowing researchers to rely on electronic health records as a valid source for scientific data.

Observational health research in Europe: understanding the General Data Protection Regulation and underlying debate

Insights into the incidence and survival of cancer, the influence of lifestyle and environmental factors and the interaction of treatment regimens with outcomes are hugely dependent on observational research, patient data derived from the healthcare system and from volunteers participating in cohort studies, often non-selective. Since 25th May 2018, the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) applies to such data. The GDPR focusses on more individual control for data subjects of 'their' data. Yet, the GDPR was preceded by a long debate. The research community participated actively in that debate, and as a result, the GDPR has research exemptions as well. Some of those apply directly; other exemptions need to be implemented into national law. Those exemptions will be discussed together with a general outline of the GDPR. I propose a substantive definition of research-absent in the GDPR-which can warrant its special status in the GDPR. The debate is not over yet. Most legal texts exhibit ambiguity and are interpreted against a background of values. In this case, those could be subsumed under informational self-determination versus solidarity and the deeper meaning of autonomy. Values will also guide national implementation and their interpretation. The value of individual control or informational self-determination should be balanced by nuanced visions about our mutual dependency in healthcare, as an ever-learning system, especially in the European solidarity-based healthcare systems. Good research governance might be a way forward to escape the consent or anonymise dichotomy.

Possible Sources of Bias in Primary Care Electronic Health Record Data Use and Reuse

BACKGROUND

Enormous amounts of data are recorded routinely in health care as part of the care process, primarily for managing individual patient care. There are significant opportunities to use these data for other purposes, many of which would contribute to establishing a learning health system. This is particularly true for data recorded in primary care settings, as in many countries, these are the first place patients turn to for most health problems.

OBJECTIVE

In this paper, we discuss whether data that are recorded routinely as part of the health care process in primary care are actually fit to use for other purposes such as research and quality of health care indicators, how the original purpose may affect the extent to which the data are fit for another purpose, and the mechanisms behind these effects. In doing so, we want to identify possible sources of bias that are relevant for the use and reuse of these type of data.

METHODS

This paper is based on the authors' experience as users of electronic health records data, as general practitioners, health informatics experts, and health services researchers. It is a product of the discussions they had during the Translational Research and Patient Safety in Europe (TRANSFoRm) project, which was funded by the European Commission and sought to develop, pilot, and evaluate a core information architecture for the learning health system in Europe, based on primary care electronic health records.

RESULTS

We first describe the different stages in the processing of electronic health record data, as well as the different purposes for which these data are used. Given the different data processing steps and purposes, we then discuss the possible mechanisms for each individual data processing step that can generate biased outcomes. We identified 13 possible sources of bias. Four of them are related to the organization of a health care system, whereas some are of a more technical nature.

CONCLUSIONS

There are a substantial number of possible sources of bias; very little is known about the size and direction of their impact. However, anyone that uses or reuses data that were recorded as part of the health care process (such as researchers and clinicians) should be aware of the associated data collection process and environmental influences that can affect the quality of the data. Our stepwise, actor- and purpose-oriented approach may help to identify these possible sources of bias. Unless data quality issues are better understood and unless adequate controls are embedded throughout the data lifecycle, data-driven health care will not live up to its expectations. We need a data quality research agenda to devise the appropriate instruments needed to assess the magnitude of each of the possible sources of bias, and then start measuring their impact. The possible sources of bias described in this paper serve as a starting point for this research agenda.

Big Data in medical research and EU data protection law: challenges to the consent or anonymise approach

Medical research is increasingly becoming data-intensive; sensitive data are being re-used, linked and analysed on an unprecedented scale. The current EU data protection law reform has led to an intense debate about its potential effect on this processing of data in medical research. To contribute to this evolving debate, this paper reviews how the dominant 'consent or anonymise approach' is challenged in a data-intensive medical research context, and discusses possible ways forwards within the EU legal framework on data protection. A large part of the debate in literature focuses on the acceptability of adapting consent or anonymisation mechanisms to overcome the challenges within these approaches. We however believe that the search for ways forward within the consent or anonymise paradigm will become increasingly difficult. Therefore, we underline the necessity of an appropriate research exemption from consent for the use of sensitive personal data in medical research to take account of all legitimate interests. The appropriate conditions of such a research exemption are however subject to debate, and we expect that there will be minimal harmonisation of these conditions in the forthcoming EU Data Protection Regulation. Further deliberation is required to determine when a shift away from consent as a legal basis is necessary and proportional in a data-intensive medical research context, and what safeguards should be put in place when such a research exemption from consent is provided.

Data research on child abuse and neglect without informed consent? Balancing interests under Dutch law

According to the Declaration of Helsinki, participation of human subjects in medical research is only acceptable if subjects have given their consent. But in child abuse and neglect, many studies use a design in which subjects do not actively participate. Data in these studies are gathered from sources such as medical records or Child Protective Services. As long as such data are used anonymously, this does not interfere with individual privacy rights. However, some research is only possible when carried out with personally identifiable data, which could potentially be misused. In this paper, we discuss in which situations and under which conditions personal data of children may be used for a study without obtaining consent. In doing so, we make use of two recent studies, performed in our hospital, in which we encountered this issue. Both studies involved collecting personal data. After careful consideration, we decided not to ask informed consent; instead, we arranged for specific safeguards to protect the subject's and their parents' privacy as well as possible.

CONCLUSION

Altogether, we conclude that our approach fits within the Dutch legal framework and seems a reasonable solution in situations in which individual privacy rights are at odds with the public interest of child abuse and neglect research. We argue that, although, in principle, data research is only acceptable after informed consent is obtained, the law should allow that, under specific circumstances and safeguards, this requirement is put aside to make research in the field of child abuse and neglect possible.

WHAT IS KNOWN

• In principle, data research is only acceptable after informed consent is obtained.• In practice, this is not always feasible.

WHAT IS NEW

• Under specific circumstances and safeguards, the informed consent requirement can be put aside.