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

Nicolas Delvaux, Bert Aertgeerts, Johan Ch van Bussel, Geert Goderis, Bert Vaes, Mieke Vermandere, Nicolas Delvaux, Bert Aertgeerts, Johan Ch van Bussel, Geert Goderis, Bert Vaes, Mieke Vermandere

Abstract

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.

Keywords: electronic health records; health information exchange; health information interoperability; learning health systems; medical record linkage.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

©Nicolas Delvaux, Bert Aertgeerts, Johan CH van Bussel, Geert Goderis, Bert Vaes, Mieke Vermandere. Originally published in JMIR Medical Informatics (http://medinform.jmir.org), 19.11.2018.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The detailed clinical model for the root concept blood pressure. CD: coded descriptor; PQ: physical quantity; TS: timestamp; ST: string (free) text. Source: https://www.healthdata.be/doc/cbb/index.php5/Be.en.hd.BloodPressure.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Data capture, data transfer, data encryption, and data reception through the Healthdata.be platform. HD4DP: Healthdata for data providers; HD4RES: Healthdata for research. Source: https://healthdata.wiv-isp.be/en/services.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Illustration of the data encryption, coding and decryption steps; SSIN: social security identification number; HD4DP: Healthdata for data providers; HD4RES: Healthdata for researchers; CSV: comma separated value; ETK: eHealth token key; E2E: end-to-end. Source: https://healthdata.wiv-isp.be/en/services.
Figure 4
Figure 4
The illustration of the feedback loop in case of missing or erroneous data using the eHealth services. HD4DP: Healthdata for data providers; CSV: comma separated value; HD4RES: Healthdata for researchers. Source: https://healthdata.wiv-isp.be/en/services.

References

    1. Institute of Medicine (IOM) The Learning Healthcare System: Workshop Summary. Washington DC: National Academies Press; 2007.
    1. Lauer MS, D'Agostino RB. The randomized registry trial--the next disruptive technology in clinical research? N Engl J Med. 2013 Oct 24;369(17):1579–81. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1310102.
    1. Angus DC. Fusing Randomized Trials With Big Data: The Key to Self-learning Health Care Systems? JAMA. 2015 Aug 25;314(8):767–8. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.7762.2429723
    1. Cowie MR, Blomster JI, Curtis LH, Duclaux S, Ford I, Fritz F, Goldman S, Janmohamed S, Kreuzer J, Leenay M, Michel A, Ong S, Pell JP, Southworth MR, Stough WG, Thoenes M, Zannad F, Zalewski A. Electronic health records to facilitate clinical research. Clin Res Cardiol. 2017 Jan;106(1):1–9. doi: 10.1007/s00392-016-1025-6. 10.1007/s00392-016-1025-6
    1. Verheij RA, Curcin V, Delaney BC, McGilchrist MM. Possible Sources of Bias in Primary Care Electronic Health Record Data Use and Reuse. J Med Internet Res. 2018 May 29;20(5):e185. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9134. v20i5e185
    1. Hersh WR, Weiner MG, Embi PJ, Logan JR, Payne PRO, Bernstam EV, Lehmann HP, Hripcsak G, Hartzog TH, Cimino JJ, Saltz JH. Caveats for the use of operational electronic health record data in comparative effectiveness research. Med Care. 2013 Aug;51(8 Suppl 3):S30–7. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31829b1dbd.
    1. van der Lei J. Use and abuse of computer-stored medical records. Methods Inf Med. 1991 Apr;30(2):79–80.91020079
    1. Coppen R, van Veen EB, Groenewegen PP, Hazes JMW, de Jong JD, Kievit J, de Neeling JND, Reijneveld SA, Verheij RA, Vroom E. Will the trilogue on the EU Data Protection Regulation recognise the importance of health research? Eur J Public Health. 2015 Oct;25(5):757–8. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckv149. ckv149
    1. Off J Eur Union. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2016. May 04, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliamentof the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal dataon the free movement of such data repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) pp. 1–88.
    1. Hersh WR, Cimino J, Payne PRO, Embi P, Logan J, Weiner M, Bernstam EV, Lehmann H, Hripcsak G, Hartzog T, Saltz J. Recommendations for the use of operational electronic health record data in comparative effectiveness research. EGEMS (Wash DC) 2013;1(1):1018. doi: 10.13063/2327-9214.1018. egems1018
    1. Institute of Medicine (IOM) Best Care at Lower Cost: The Path to Continuously Learning Health Care in America. Washington DC: National Academies Press; 2013.
    1. Celi LA, Davidzon G, Johnson AE, Komorowski M, Marshall DC, Nair SS, Phillips CT, Pollard TJ, Raffa JD, Salciccioli JD, Salgueiro FM, Stone DJ. Bridging the Health Data Divide. J Med Internet Res. 2016 Dec 20;18(12):e325. doi: 10.2196/jmir.6400. v18i12e325
    1. Truyers C, Goderis G, Dewitte H, Akker MV, Buntinx F. The Intego database: background, methods and basic results of a Flemish general practice-based continuous morbidity registration project. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2014 Jun 06;14:48. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-14-48. 1472-6947-14-48
    1. Delvaux N, De Sutter A, Van de Velde S, Ramaekers D, Fieuws S, Aertgeerts B. Electronic Laboratory Medicine ordering with evidence-based Order sets in primary care (ELMO study): protocol for a cluster randomised trial. Implement Sci. 2017 Dec 06;12(1):147. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0685-6. 10.1186/s13012-017-0685-6
    1. Institute of Medicine (IOM) Digital Data Improvement Priorities for Continuous Learning in Health and Health Care: Workshop Summary. Washington DC: National Academies Press; 2013.
    1. Goossen W, Goossen-Baremans A, van der Zel DZM. Detailed clinical models: a review. Healthc Inform Res. 2010 Dec;16(4):201–14. doi: 10.4258/hir.2010.16.4.201.
    1. Moreno-Conde A, Moner D, Cruz WDD, Santos MR, Maldonado JA, Robles M, Kalra D. Clinical information modeling processes for semantic interoperability of electronic health records: systematic review and inductive analysis. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2015 Jul;22(4):925–34. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocv008.ocv008
    1. Health informatics - Detailed clinical models, characteristics and processes. Geneva: ISO; 2015. [2018-10-09].
    1. Vawdrey DK, Weng C, Herion D, Cimino JJ. Enhancing electronic health records to support clinical research. AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc. 2014;2014:102–8.
    1. Institute of Medicine (IOM) Digital Infrastructure for the Learning Health System: The Foundation for Continuous Improvement in HealthHealth Care: Workshop Series Summary Internet. Grossmann C, Powers B, McGinnis JM. editors. Washington DC: National Academies Press (US); 2011.
    1. Cookbook End-to-end Encryption Known recipient Version 2.4. Brussels: eHealth Platform; 2018. Jul 18, [2018-10-09]. .
    1. eHealthbox v3.0 Consultation Web Service Cookbook Version 3.2. Brussels: eHealth Platform; 2018. Apr 30, [2018-10-09]. .
    1. Seals Web Service v1.0 Cookbook version 2.1. eHealth Platform; 2018. Mar 16, [2018-10-09]. .
    1. Fleming D, Elliott C, Pringle M. Electronic Health Indicator Data (eHID): Report from the programme Public Health and Risk Assessment, Health and Consumer Protection. Public Health and Risk Assessment, Health and Consumer Protection. Strand I: Health Information Priority 2.2.5: eHealth. Directorate General SANCO. European Commission; 2008. Apr 09, [2018-10-09]. .
    1. Logical observation identifiers names and code (LOINC) ReTaM LOINC; [2018-10-09]. .
    1. Pedersen KM, Andersen JS, Søndergaard J. General practice and primary health care in Denmark. J Am Board Fam Med. 2012 Mar;25 Suppl 1:S34–8. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2012.02.110216. 25/Suppl_1/S34
    1. Limb M. Controversial database of medical records is scrapped over security concerns. BMJ. 2016 Jul 07;354:i3804.
    1. Mold F, de Lusignan S. Patients' Online Access to Their Primary Care Electronic Health Records and Linked Online Services: Implications for Research and Practice. J Pers Med. 2015 Dec 04;5(4):452–69. doi: 10.3390/jpm5040452. jpm5040452
    1. Williams T, van Staa T, Puri S, Eaton S. Recent advances in the utility and use of the General Practice Research Database as an example of a UK Primary Care Data resource. Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2012 Apr;3(2):89–99. doi: 10.1177/2042098611435911. 10.1177_2042098611435911
    1. Schweikardt C, Verheij RA, Donker GA, Coppieters Y. The historical development of the Dutch Sentinel General Practice Network from a paper-based into a digital primary care monitoring system. J Public Health. 2016 Aug 15;24(6):545–562. doi: 10.1007/s10389-016-0753-4.

Source: PubMed

3
Předplatit