Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Christian G. Reich is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Christian G. Reich.


Annals of Internal Medicine | 2010

Advancing the Science for Active Surveillance: Rationale and Design for the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership

Paul E. Stang; Patrick B. Ryan; Judith A. Racoosin; J. Marc Overhage; Abraham G. Hartzema; Christian G. Reich; Emily Welebob; Thomas Scarnecchia; Janet Woodcock

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Amendments Act of 2007 mandated that the FDA develop a system for using automated health care data to identify risks of marketed drugs and other medical products. The Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership is a public-private partnership among the FDA, academia, data owners, and the pharmaceutical industry that is responding to the need to advance the science of active medical product safety surveillance by using existing observational databases. The Observational Medical Outcomes Partnerships transparent, open innovation approach is designed to systematically and empirically study critical governance, data resource, and methodological issues and their interrelationships in establishing a viable national program of active drug safety surveillance by using observational data. This article describes the governance structure, data-access model, methods-testing approach, and technology development of this effort, as well as the work that has been initiated.


Studies in health technology and informatics | 2015

Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI): Opportunities for Observational Researchers.

George Hripcsak; Jon D. Duke; Nigam H. Shah; Christian G. Reich; Vojtech Huser; Martijn J. Schuemie; Marc A. Suchard; Rae Woong Park; Ian C. K. Wong; Peter R. Rijnbeek; Johan van der Lei; Nicole L. Pratt; G. Niklas Norén; Yu Chuan Li; Paul E. Stang; David Madigan; Patrick B. Ryan

The vision of creating accessible, reliable clinical evidence by accessing the clincial experience of hundreds of millions of patients across the globe is a reality. Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) has built on learnings from the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership to turn methods research and insights into a suite of applications and exploration tools that move the field closer to the ultimate goal of generating evidence about all aspects of healthcare to serve the needs of patients, clinicians and all other decision-makers around the world.


Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | 2016

Characterizing treatment pathways at scale using the OHDSI network

George Hripcsak; Patrick B. Ryan; Jon D. Duke; Nigam H. Shah; Rae Woong Park; Vojtech Huser; Marc A. Suchard; Martijn J. Schuemie; Frank J. DeFalco; Adler J. Perotte; Juan M. Banda; Christian G. Reich; Lisa M. Schilling; Michael E. Matheny; Daniella Meeker; Nicole L. Pratt; David Madigan

Observational research promises to complement experimental research by providing large, diverse populations that would be infeasible for an experiment. Observational research can test its own clinical hypotheses, and observational studies also can contribute to the design of experiments and inform the generalizability of experimental research. Understanding the diversity of populations and the variance in care is one component. In this study, the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) collaboration created an international data network with 11 data sources from four countries, including electronic health records and administrative claims data on 250 million patients. All data were mapped to common data standards, patient privacy was maintained by using a distributed model, and results were aggregated centrally. Treatment pathways were elucidated for type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and depression. The pathways revealed that the world is moving toward more consistent therapy over time across diseases and across locations, but significant heterogeneity remains among sources, pointing to challenges in generalizing clinical trial results. Diabetes favored a single first-line medication, metformin, to a much greater extent than hypertension or depression. About 10% of diabetes and depression patients and almost 25% of hypertension patients followed a treatment pathway that was unique within the cohort. Aside from factors such as sample size and underlying population (academic medical center versus general population), electronic health records data and administrative claims data revealed similar results. Large-scale international observational research is feasible.


Journal of Biomedical Informatics | 2012

Evaluation of alternative standardized terminologies for medical conditions within a network of observational healthcare databases

Christian G. Reich; Patrick B. Ryan; Paul E. Stang; Mitra Rocca

Large electronic databases of health care information, such as administrative claims and electronic health records, are available and are being used in a number of public health settings, including drug safety surveillance. However, because of a lack of standardization, clinical terminologies may differ across databases. With the aid of existing resources and expert coders, we have developed mapping tables to convert ICD-9-CM diagnosis codes used in some existing databases to SNOMED-CT and MedDRA. In addition, previously developed definitions for specific health outcomes of interest were mapped to the same standardized vocabularies. We evaluated how vocabulary mapping affected (1) the retention of clinical data from two test databases, (2) the semantic space of outcome definitions, (3) the prevalence of each outcome in the test databases, and (4) the reliability of analytic methods designed to detect drug-outcome associations in the test databases. Although vocabulary mapping affected the semantic space of some outcome definitions, as well as the prevalence of some outcomes in the test databases, it had only minor effects on the analysis of drug-outcome associations. Furthermore, both SNOMED-CT and MedDRA were viable for use as standardized vocabularies in systems designed to perform active medical product surveillance using disparate sources of observational data.


Drug Safety | 2014

Bridging Islands of Information to Establish an Integrated Knowledge Base of Drugs and Health Outcomes of Interest

Richard D. Boyce; Patrick B. Ryan; G. Niklas Norén; Martijn J. Schuemie; Christian G. Reich; Jon D. Duke; Nicholas P. Tatonetti; Gianluca Trifirò; Rave Harpaz; J. Marc Overhage; Abraham G. Hartzema; Mark Khayter; Erica A. Voss; Christophe G. Lambert; Vojtech Huser; Michel Dumontier

The entire drug safety enterprise has a need to search, retrieve, evaluate, and synthesize scientific evidence more efficiently. This discovery and synthesis process would be greatly accelerated through access to a common framework that brings all relevant information sources together within a standardized structure. This presents an opportunity to establish an open-source community effort to develop a global knowledge base, one that brings together and standardizes all available information for all drugs and all health outcomes of interest (HOIs) from all electronic sources pertinent to drug safety. To make this vision a reality, we have established a workgroup within the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI, http://ohdsi.org) collaborative. The workgroup’s mission is to develop an open-source standardized knowledge base for the effects of medical products and an efficient procedure for maintaining and expanding it. The knowledge base will make it simpler for practitioners to access, retrieve, and synthesize evidence so that they can reach a rigorous and accurate assessment of causal relationships between a given drug and HOI. Development of the knowledge base will proceed with the measureable goal of supporting an efficient and thorough evidence-based assessment of the effects of 1,000 active ingredients across 100 HOIs. This non-trivial task will result in a high-quality and generally applicable drug safety knowledge base. It will also yield a reference standard of drug–HOI pairs that will enable more advanced methodological research that empirically evaluates the performance of drug safety analysis methods.


Drug Safety | 2013

Alternative Outcome Definitions and Their Effect on the Performance of Methods for Observational Outcome Studies

Christian G. Reich; Patrick B. Ryan; Martijn J. Schuemie

BackgroundA systematic risk identification system has the potential to test marketed drugs for important Health Outcomes of Interest or HOI. For each HOI, multiple definitions are used in the literature, and some of them are validated for certain databases. However, little is known about the effect of different definitions on the ability of methods to estimate their association with medical products.ObjectivesAlternative definitions of HOI were studied for their effect on the performance of analytical methods in observational outcome studies.MethodsA set of alternative definitions for three HOI were defined based on literature review and clinical diagnosis guidelines: acute kidney injury, acute liver injury and acute myocardial infarction. The definitions varied by the choice of diagnostic codes and the inclusion of procedure codes and lab values. They were then used to empirically study an array of analytical methods with various analytical choices in four observational healthcare databases. The methods were executed against predefined drug-HOI pairs to generate an effect estimate and standard error for each pair. These test cases included positive controls (active ingredients with evidence to suspect a positive association with the outcome) and negative controls (active ingredients with no evidence to expect an effect on the outcome). Three different performance metrics where used: (i) Area Under the Receiver Operator Characteristics (ROC) curve (AUC) as a measure of a method’s ability to distinguish between positive and negative test cases, (ii) Measure of bias by estimation of distribution of observed effect estimates for the negative test pairs where the true effect can be assumed to be one (no relative risk), and (iii) Minimal Detectable Relative Risk (MDRR) as a measure of whether there is sufficient power to generate effect estimates.ResultsIn the three outcomes studied, different definitions of outcomes show comparable ability to differentiate true from false control cases (AUC) and a similar bias estimation. However, broader definitions generating larger outcome cohorts allowed more drugs to be studied with sufficient statistical power.ConclusionsBroader definitions are preferred since they allow studying drugs with lower prevalence than the more precise or narrow definitions while showing comparable performance characteristics in differentiation of signal vs. no signal as well as effect size estimation.


Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety | 2016

Design and analysis choices for safety surveillance evaluations need to be tuned to the specifics of the hypothesized drug–outcome association

Susan Gruber; Aloka Chakravarty; Susan R. Heckbert; Mark Levenson; David E. Martin; Jennifer C. Nelson; Bruce M. Psaty; Simone P. Pinheiro; Christian G. Reich; Sengwee Toh; Alexander M. Walker

We reviewed the results of the Observational Medical Outcomes Research Partnership (OMOP) 2010 Experiment in hopes of finding examples where apparently well‐designed drug studies repeatedly produce anomalous findings. OMOP had applied thousands of designs and design parameters to 53 drug–outcome pairs across 10 electronic data resources. Our intent was to use this repository to elucidate some sources of error in observational studies.


Drug Safety | 2013

Managing Data Quality for a Drug Safety Surveillance System

Abraham G. Hartzema; Christian G. Reich; Patrick B. Ryan; Paul E. Stang; David Madigan; Emily Welebob; J. Marc Overhage

ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to present a data quality assurance program for disparate data sources loaded into a Common Data Model, highlight data quality issues identified and resolutions implemented.BackgroundThe Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership is conducting methodological research to develop a system to monitor drug safety. Standard processes and tools are needed to ensure continuous data quality across a network of disparate databases, and to ensure that procedures used to extract-transform-load (ETL) processes maintain data integrity. Currently, there is no consensus or standard approach to evaluate the quality of the source data, or ETL procedures.MethodsWe propose a framework for a comprehensive process to ensure data quality throughout the steps used to process and analyze the data. The approach used to manage data anomalies includes: (1) characterization of data sources; (2) detection of data anomalies; (3) determining the cause of data anomalies; and (4) remediation.FindingsData anomalies included incomplete raw dataset: no race or year of birth recorded. Implausible data: year of birth exceeding current year, observation period end date precedes start date, suspicious data frequencies and proportions outside normal range. Examples of errors found in the ETL process were zip codes incorrectly loaded, drug quantities rounded, drug exposure length incorrectly calculated, and condition length incorrectly programmed.ConclusionsComplete and reliable observational data are difficult to obtain, data quality assurance processes need to be continuous as data is regularly updated; consequently, processes to assess data quality should be ongoing and transparent.


Drug Safety | 2013

The Impact of Drug and Outcome Prevalence on the Feasibility and Performance of Analytical Methods for a Risk Identification and Analysis System

Christian G. Reich; Patrick B. Ryan; Marc A. Suchard

BackgroundA systematic risk identification system has the potential to study all marketed drugs. However, the rates of drug exposure and outcome occurrences in observational databases, the database size and the desired risk detection threshold determine the power and therefore limit the feasibility of the application of appropriate analytical methods. Drugs vary dramatically for these parameters because of their prevalence of indication, cost, time on the market, payer formularies, market pressures and clinical guidelines.ObjectivesEvaluate (i) the feasibility of a risk identification system based on commercially available observational databases, (ii) the range of drugs that can be studied for certain outcomes, (iii) the influence of underpowered drug-outcome pairs on the performance of analytical methods estimating the strength of their association and (iv) the time required from the introduction of a new drug to accumulate sufficient data for signal detection.MethodsAs part of the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership experiment, we used data from commercially available observational databases and calculated the minimal detectable relative risk of all pairs of marketed drugs and eight health outcomes of interest. We then studied an array of analytical methods for their ability to distinguish between pre-determined positive and negative drug-outcome test pairs. The positive controls contained active ingredients with evidence of a positive association with the outcome, and the negative controls had no such evidence. As a performance measure we used the area under the receiver operator characteristics curve (AUC). We compared the AUC of methods using all test pairs or only pairs sufficiently powered for detection of a relative risk of 1.25. Finally, we studied all drugs introduced to the market in 2003–2008 and determined the time required to achieve the same minimal detectable relative risk threshold.ResultsThe performance of methods improved after restricting them to fully powered drug-outcome pairs. The availability of drug-outcome pairs with sufficient power to detect a relative risk of 1.25 varies enormously among outcomes. Depending on the market uptake, drugs can generate relevant signals in the first month after approval, or never reach sufficient power.ConclusionThe incidence of drugs and important outcomes determines sample size and method performance in estimating drug-outcome associations. Careful consideration is therefore necessary to choose databases and outcome definitions, particularly for newly introduced drugs.


Journal of Biomedical Semantics | 2017

Large-scale adverse effects related to treatment evidence standardization (LAERTES): an open scalable system for linking pharmacovigilance evidence sources with clinical data.

Richard D. Boyce; Erica A. Voss; Vojtech Huser; Lee Evans; Christian G. Reich; Jon D. Duke; Nicholas P. Tatonetti; Tal Lorberbaum; Michel Dumontier; Manfred Hauben; Magnus Wallberg; Lili Peng; Sara Dempster; Yongqun He; Anthony G. Sena; Vassilis Koutkias; Pantelis Natsiavas; Patrick B. Ryan

BackgroundIntegrating multiple sources of pharmacovigilance evidence has the potential to advance the science of safety signal detection and evaluation. In this regard, there is a need for more research on how to integrate multiple disparate evidence sources while making the evidence computable from a knowledge representation perspective (i.e., semantic enrichment). Existing frameworks suggest well-promising outcomes for such integration but employ a rather limited number of sources. In particular, none have been specifically designed to support both regulatory and clinical use cases, nor have any been designed to add new resources and use cases through an open architecture. This paper discusses the architecture and functionality of a system called Large-scale Adverse Effects Related to Treatment Evidence Standardization (LAERTES) that aims to address these shortcomings.ResultsLAERTES provides a standardized, open, and scalable architecture for linking evidence sources relevant to the association of drugs with health outcomes of interest (HOIs). Standard terminologies are used to represent different entities. For example, drugs and HOIs are represented in RxNorm and Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine -- Clinical Terms respectively. At the time of this writing, six evidence sources have been loaded into the LAERTES evidence base and are accessible through prototype evidence exploration user interface and a set of Web application programming interface services. This system operates within a larger software stack provided by the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics clinical research framework, including the relational Common Data Model for observational patient data created by the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership. Elements of the Linked Data paradigm facilitate the systematic and scalable integration of relevant evidence sources.ConclusionsThe prototype LAERTES system provides useful functionality while creating opportunities for further research. Future work will involve improving the method for normalizing drug and HOI concepts across the integrated sources, aggregated evidence at different levels of a hierarchy of HOI concepts, and developing more advanced user interface for drug-HOI investigations.Background Integrating multiple sources of pharmacovigilance evidence has the potential to advance the science of safety signal detection and evaluation. In this regard, there is a need for more research on how to integrate multiple disparate evidence sources while making the evidence computable from a knowledge representation perspective (i.e., semantic enrichment). Existing frameworks suggest well-promising outcomes for such integration but employ a rather limited number of sources. In particular, none have been specifically designed to support both regulatory and clinical use cases, nor have any been designed to add new resources and use cases through an open architecture. This paper discusses the architecture and functionality of a system called Large-scale Adverse Effects Related to Treatment Evidence Standardization (LAERTES) that aims to address these shortcomings. Results LAERTES provides a standardized, open, and scalable architecture for linking evidence sources relevant to the association of drugs with health outcomes of interest (HOIs). Standard terminologies are used to represent different entities. For example, drugs and HOIs are represented in RxNorm and Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine -- Clinical Terms respectively. At the time of this writing, six evidence sources have been loaded into the LAERTES evidence base and are accessible through prototype evidence exploration user interface and a set of Web application programming interface services. This system operates within a larger software stack provided by the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics clinical research framework, including the relational Common Data Model for observational patient data created by the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership. Elements of the Linked Data paradigm facilitate the systematic and scalable integration of relevant evidence sources. Conclusions The prototype LAERTES system provides useful functionality while creating opportunities for further research. Future work will involve improving the method for normalizing drug and HOI concepts across the integrated sources, aggregated evidence at different levels of a hierarchy of HOI concepts, and developing more advanced user interface for drug-HOI investigations.

Collaboration


Dive into the Christian G. Reich's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge