An Electronic Specimen Collection Protocol Schema (eSCPS)

BioSCOOP - Biobank Sample Communication Protocol. New approach for the transfer of information between biobanks

Dynamic development of biobanking industry (both business and science) resulted in an increased number of IT systems for samples and data management. The most difficult and complicated case for the biobanking community was cooperation between institutions, equipped with different IT systems, in the field of scientific research, mainly data interchange and information flow. Tools available on the market relate mainly to the biobank or collection level. Efficient and universal protocols including the detailed information about the donor and the sample are still very limited. Here, we have developed BioSCOOP, a communication protocol in the form of a well documented JSON API. The main aim of this study was to harmonize and standardize the rules of communication between biobanks on the level of information about the donor together with information about the sample. The purpose was to create a communication protocol for two applications: to transfer the information between different biobanks and to allow the searching and presentation of the sample and data sets.

Biobanks and Their Clinical Application and Informatics Challenges

Biobanks are one of the most important biomedical research resources and contribute to the development of biomarker detection, molecular diagnosis, translational medicine, and multidisciplinary disease research, as well as studies of interactions between genetic and environmental or lifestyle factors. Aiming for the wide clinical application of biobanks, biobanking efforts have recently switched from a focus on accumulating samples to both formalizing and sustaining collections in light of the rapid progress in the fields of personalized medicine and bioinformatics analysis. With the emergence of novel molecular diagnostic technologies, although the bioinformatics platform of biobanks ensures reliable bioinformatics analysis of patient samples, there are a series of challenges facing biobanks in terms of the overall harmonization of policies, integrated processes, and local informatics solutions across the network. Further, there is a controversy regarding the increased role of ethical boards, governance, and accreditation bodies in ensuring that collected samples have sufficient informatics capabilities to be used in biobanks. In this volume, we present a selection of current issues on the inevitable challenges of the clinical application of biobanks in informatics.

Improving Bridging from Informatics Practice to Theory

BACKGROUND

In 1962, Methods of Information in Medicine ( MIM ) began to publish papers on the methodology and scientific fundamentals of organizing, representing, and analyzing data, information, and knowledge in biomedicine and health care. Considered a companion journal, Applied Clinical Informatics ( ACI ) was launched in 2009 with a mission to establish a platform that allows sharing of knowledge between clinical medicine and health IT specialists as well as to bridge gaps between visionary design and successful and pragmatic deployment of clinical information systems. Both journals are official journals of the International Medical Informatics Association.

OBJECTIVES

As a follow-up to prior work, we set out to explore congruencies and interdependencies in publications of ACI and MIM. The objectives were to describe the major topics discussed in articles published in ACI in 2014 and to determine if there was evidence that theory in 2014 MIM publications was informed by practice described in ACI publications in any year. We also set out to describe lessons learned in the context of bridging informatics practice and theory and offer opinions on how ACI editorial policies could evolve to foster and improve such bridging.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational study and reviewed all articles published in ACI during the calendar year 2014 (Volume 5) for their main theme, conclusions, and key words. We then reviewed the citations of all MIM papers from 2014 to determine if there were references to ACI articles from any year. Lessons learned in the context of bridging informatics practice and theory and opinions on ACI editorial policies were developed by consensus among the two authors.

RESULTS

A total of 70 articles were published in ACI in 2014. Clinical decision support, clinical documentation, usability, Meaningful Use, health information exchange, patient portals, and clinical research informatics emerged as major themes. Only one MIM article from 2014 cited an ACI article. There are several lessons learned including the possibility that there may not be direct links between MIM theory and ACI practice articles. ACI editorial policies will continue to evolve to reflect the breadth and depth of the practice of clinical informatics and articles received for publication. Efforts to encourage bridging of informatics practice and theory may be considered by the ACI editors.

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of direct links from informatics theory-based papers published in MIM in 2014 to papers published in ACI continues as was described for papers published during 2012 to 2013 in the two companion journals. Thus, there is little evidence that theory in MIM has been informed by practice in ACI.