Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Aug 16;29(9):1480-1488.
doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocac097.

Standardizing, harmonizing, and protecting data collection to broaden the impact of COVID-19 research: the rapid acceleration of diagnostics-underserved populations (RADx-UP) initiative

Gabriel A Carrillo  1   2 , Michael Cohen-Wolkowiez  1   2 , Emily M D'Agostino  3   4   5 , Keith Marsolo  2   5 , Lisa M Wruck  2   6 , Laura Johnson  2 , James Topping  2 , Al Richmond  7 , Giselle Corbie  8   9   10 , Warren A Kibbe  6   11
Affiliations
Review

Standardizing, harmonizing, and protecting data collection to broaden the impact of COVID-19 research: the rapid acceleration of diagnostics-underserved populations (RADx-UP) initiative

Gabriel A Carrillo et al. J Am Med Inform Assoc. .

Abstract

Objective: The Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics-Underserved Populations (RADx-UP) program is a consortium of community-engaged research projects with the goal of increasing access to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) tests in underserved populations. To accelerate clinical research, common data elements (CDEs) were selected and refined to standardize data collection and enhance cross-consortium analysis.

Materials and methods: The RADx-UP consortium began with more than 700 CDEs from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) CDE Repository, Disaster Research Response (DR2) guidelines, and the PHENotypes and eXposures (PhenX) Toolkit. Following a review of initial CDEs, we made selections and further refinements through an iterative process that included live forums, consultations, and surveys completed by the first 69 RADx-UP projects.

Results: Following a multistep CDE development process, we decreased the number of CDEs, modified the question types, and changed the CDE wording. Most research projects were willing to collect and share demographic NIH Tier 1 CDEs, with the top exception reason being a lack of CDE applicability to the project. The NIH RADx-UP Tier 1 CDE with the lowest frequency of collection and sharing was sexual orientation.

Discussion: We engaged a wide range of projects and solicited bidirectional input to create CDEs. These RADx-UP CDEs could serve as the foundation for a patient-centered informatics architecture allowing the integration of disease-specific databases to support hypothesis-driven clinical research in underserved populations.

Conclusion: A community-engaged approach using bidirectional feedback can lead to the better development and implementation of CDEs in underserved populations during public health emergencies.

Keywords: common data elements; community research; data privacy; health equity; underserved populations.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
RDX-UP CDE development steps and timeline.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
NIH RADx-UP Tier 1 and Tier 2 common data elements (CDEs).
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
RADx-UP CDE dashboard for demographics.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Kim HH, Park YR, Lee S, Kim JH.. Composite CDE: modeling composite relationships between common data elements for representing complex clinical data. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2020; 20 (1): 147. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ferranti JM, Musser RC, Kawamoto K, Hammond WE.. The clinical document architecture and the continuity of care record: a critical analysis. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2006; 13 (3): 245–52. - PMC - PubMed
    1. He Z, Tang X, Yang X, et al.Clinical trial generalizability assessment in the Big Data Era: a review. Clin Transl Sci 2020; 13 (4): 675–84. - PMC - PubMed
    1. FitzGerald C, Hurst S.. Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: a systematic review. BMC Med Ethics 2017; 18 (1): 19. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Leslie D, Mazumder A, Peppin A, Wolters MK, Hagerty A.. Does “AI” stand for augmenting inequality in the era of covid-19 healthcare? BMJ 2021; 372: n304. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types