RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 An Ontology-based Approach to Guide and Document Variable and Data Source Selection and Data Integration Process to Support Integrative Data Analysis in Cancer Outcomes Research
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.05.28.20115907
DO 10.1101/2020.05.28.20115907
A1 Zhang, Hansi
A1 Guo, Yi
A1 Bian, Jiang
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/30/2020.05.28.20115907.abstract
AB Background To reduce cancer mortality and improve cancer outcomes, it is critical to understand the various cancer risk factors (RFs) across different domains (e.g., genetic, environmental, and behavioral risk factors) and levels (e.g., individual, interpersonal, and community levels). However, prior research on RFs of cancer outcomes, has primarily focused on individual level RFs due to the lack of integrated datasets that contain multi-level, multi-domain RFs. Further, the lack of a consensus and proper guidance on systematically identify RFs also increase the difficulty of RF selection from heterogenous data sources in a multi-level integrative data analysis (mIDA) study. More importantly, as mIDA studies require integrating heterogenous data sources, the data integration processes in the limited number of existing mIDA studies are inconsistently performed and poorly documented, and thus threatening transparency and reproducibility.Methods Informed by the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD) research framework, we (1) reviewed existing reporting guidelines from the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) network and (2) developed a theory-driven reporting guideline to guide the RF variable selection, data source selection, and data integration process. Then, we developed an ontology to standardize the documentation of the RF selection and data integration process in mIDA studies.Results We summarized the review results and created a reporting guideline—ATTEST—for reporting the variable selection and data source selection and integration process. We provided an ATTEST check list to help researchers to annotate and clearly document each step of their mIDA studies to ensure the transparency and reproducibility. We used the ATTEST to report two mIDA case studies and further transformed annotation results into sematic triples, so that the relationships among variables, data sources and integration processes are explicitly standardized and modeled using the classes and properties from OD-ATTEST.Conclusion Our ontology-based reporting guideline solves some key challenges in current mIDA studies for cancer outcomes research, through providing (1) a theory-driven guidance for multi-level and multi-domain RF variable and data source selection; and (2) a standardized documentation of the data selection and integration processes powered by an ontology, thus a way to enable sharing of mIDA study reports among researchers.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study was supported in part by the National Institute of Health (NIH) awards UL1TR001427 and R01CA246418 and Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) award ME-2018C3-14754. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH or PCORI.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Our study doesn't require IRB approval.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll the data needed are included in the manuscript.ACSAmerican Cancer SocietyBRFSSBehavioral Risk Factor Surveillance SystemEQUATOREnhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health ResearchFCDSFlorida Cancer Data System mIDA Multi-level Integrative Data AnalysisNIHNational Institute of HealthNIMHDMinority Health and Health DisparitiesOD-ATTESTOntology for the Documentation of Variable and Data Source Selection and Integration ProcessRFRisk FactorUSUnited StatesRUCARural-Urban Commuting AreaNCHSNational Center for Health StatisticsBFOBasic Formal OntologyNCBONational Center for Biomedical OntologyRDFResource Description FrameworkGRIPSGenetic RIsk Prediction StudiesCOHEREChecklist for One Health Epidemiological Reporting of Evidence EHR Electronic Health RecordsOBIOntology for Biomedical InvestigationsIAOInformation Artifact OntologyNCItNational Cancer Institute ThesaurusSTATOStatistics OntologySIOSemanticscience Integrated OntologyCDMCommon Data ModelPCORnetThe national Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network