Skip to main content

Abstract

The analysis of data in healthcare, in both operations and research, comprises a major function throughout the industry. The analysis of data (analytics) and the management and curation of data (informatics) are closely associated and confront similar challenges. Chief among them are issues of data quality, particularly the comparability and consistency of the underlying data. There are myriad applications of analytics, ranging from biomedical research and discovery to fiscal management. The methodologies encompassed by analytics range from tabulation to machine learning, with variations on visualization, statistical models, and dashboards in between. Analytics play a crucial role in healthcare operations, the most high profile examples being case mix determination and clinical decision support. The emerging trends of “big data,” ubiquitous computing, and the anticipated deluge of data streams from omics sciences, continuous wireless monitoring, and personal and home health devices will continue to see analytics transform in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Bae CJ, Griffith S, Fan Y, et al. The challenges of data quality evaluation in a joint data warehouse. EGEMS (Wash DC). 2015;3(1):1125.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Melnik TA, Guldal CG, Schoen LD, Alicandro J, Henfield P. Barriers in accurate and complete birth registration in New York State. Matern Child Health J. 2015;19(9):1943–8.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Weiskopf NG, Hripcsak G, Swaminathan S, Weng C. Defining and measuring completeness of electronic health records for secondary use. J Biomed Inform. 2013;46(5):830–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. HL7. Health level seven international. [Internet] 2015; Available from: www.hl7.org.

  5. HL7. v3 code system nullFlavor. 2015; http://hl7.org/fhir/null-flavor.html.

  6. Donders AR, van der Heijden GJ, Stijnen T, Moons KG. Review: a gentle introduction to imputation of missing values. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59(10):1087–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. van Buuren S. Flexible imputation of missing data. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2012.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. National Library of Medicine (NLM). [Internet] ICD-9-CM diagnostic codes to SNOMED CT map. 2015; Available from: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/mapping_projects/icd9cm_to_snomedct.html.

  9. Nadkarni PM, Darer JA. Migrating existing clinical content from ICD-9 to SNOMED. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2010;17(5):602–7.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Pathak J, Bailey KR, Beebe CE, et al. Normalization and standardization of electronic health records for high-throughput phenotyping: the SHARPn consortium. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(e2):e341–8.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dixon BE, Colvard C, Tierney WM. Identifying health facilities outside the enterprise: challenges and strategies for supporting health reform and meaningful use. Inform Health Soc Care. 2014;24:1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics (NCVHS) Subcommittee on Standards and Security. Hearing minutes, July 20–21, 1998. [Internet] 1998; Available from: http://www.ncvhs.hhs.gov/transcripts-minutes/minutes-transcripts-of-ncvhs-meetings-archives-1998-2002-and-inactive-workgroups/980720mn.htm.

  13. Hillestad R, Bigelow JH, Chaudhry B, et al. Identity crisis: an examination of the costs and benefits of a unique patient identifier for the U.S. health care system. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. Patient identification and matching: Final Report 2014; [Internet] Available from: http://www.healthit.gov/sites/default/files/patient_identification_matching_final_report.pdf.

  15. Brand RA. Ernest amory codman, MD, 1869-1940. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467(11):2763–5.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Nelson CW. The surgical careers of the Mayo brothers. Mayo Clin Proc. 1998;73(8):716.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Doll R, Hill AB. Smoking and carcinoma of the lung; preliminary report. Br Med J. 1950;2(4682):739–48.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Melton 3rd LJ. History of the rochester epidemiology project. Mayo Clin Proc. 1996;71(3):266–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Frank L, Basch E, Selby JV, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. The PCORI perspective on patient-centered outcomes research. JAMA. 2014;312(15):1513–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Newton KM, Peissig PL, Kho AN, et al. Validation of electronic medical record-based phenotyping algorithms: results and lessons learned from the eMERGE network. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(e1):e147–54.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Wennberg J, Gittelsohn. Small area variations in health care delivery. Science. 1973;182(4117):1102–8.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Berwick DM, Nolan TW, Whittington J. The triple aim: care, health, and cost. Health Aff (Millwood). 2008;27(3):759–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Berry DA, Eick SG. Adaptive assignment versus balanced randomization in clinical trials: a decision analysis. Stat Med. 1995;14(3):231–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rosenberger WF, Sverdlov O, Hu F. Adaptive randomization for clinical trials. J Biopharm Stat. 2012;22(4):719–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Chute CG, Ullman-Cullere M, Wood GM, Lin SM, He M, Pathak J. Some experiences and opportunities for big data in translational research. Genet Med. 2013;15(10):802–9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Office of the National Coordinator. Meaningful use regulations. 2015; [Internet] Available from: http://www.healthit.gov/policy-researchers-implementers/meaningful-use-regulations.

  27. MGMA Government Affairs Department. The federal EHR incentive program: achieving ‘meaningful use’. MGMA Connex. 2010;10(8):14–6.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Cortese DA, Korsmo JO. Putting U.S. health care on the right track. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(14):1326–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Institute of Medicine (U.S.). Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care, Grossmann C, Powers B, McGinnis JM, Institute of Medicine (U.S.). Digital infrastructure for the learning health system: the foundation for continuous improvement in health and health care: workshop series summary. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  30. The W. Edwards Demming Institute. The PDSA cycle. [Internet] Available from: https://www.deming.org/theman/theories/pdsacycle. Accessed June 2015.

  31. Fisher ES, Staiger DO, Bynum JP, Gottlieb DJ. Creating accountable care organizations: the extended hospital medical staff. Health Aff (Millwood). 2007;26(1):w44–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. McClellan M. Accountable care organizations and evidence-based payment reform. JAMA. 2015;313(21):2128–30.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Dreiseitl S, Ohno-Machado L. Logistic regression and artificial neural network classification models: a methodology review. J Biomed Inform. 2002;35(5-6):352–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Weiner JP, Starfield BH, Steinwachs DM, Mumford LM. Development and application of a population-oriented measure of ambulatory care case-mix. Med Care. 1991;29(5):452–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. National Quality Forum. 2015; [Internet] Available from: http://www.qualityforum.org/Home.aspx.

  36. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. 2014 clinical quality measures. 2015; [Internet] Available from: http://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Legislation/EHRIncentivePrograms/2014_ClinicalQualityMeasures.html.

  37. One Hundred Eleventh Congress. Health information technology for economic and clinical health act. 2009; [Internet] Available from: http://healthit.gov/sites/default/files/hitech_act_excerpt_from_arra_with_index.pdf, HR 1.

  38. DeMets D, Tabak L, Altman R, et al. Data and informatics working group report to the advisory committee to the director. Bethesda: NIH; 2012; June 15, 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  39. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Web of things at W3C. 2015; [Internet] Available from: http://www.w3.org/WoT/.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher G. Chute MD, DrPH .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Chute, C.G. (2016). Analytics. In: Finnell, J., Dixon, B. (eds) Clinical Informatics Study Guide. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22753-5_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22753-5_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-22752-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-22753-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics