September 7, 2018 Courtney Baird, MS

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Manatt manatt | phelps | phillips New York State Health Information Technology Summit Initiative Overview and Update Rachel Block, Project Director United.
Advertisements

Consensus Building Infrastructure Developing Implementation Doing & Refining Guiding Principles of RtI Provide working knowledge & understanding of: -
Alaska Native Education Program (ANEP) Technical Assistance Meeting September 2014 Sylvia E. Lyles Valerie Randall Almita Reed.
CADTH Therapeutic Reviews
S&I Data Provenance Initiative Presentation to the HITSC on Data Provenance September 10, 2014.
CCC Team Assessment of Care Coordination Capacity February 26, 2014 Care Coordination Collaborative California Institute for Mental Health Care Coordination.
Competencies of Nurse Educators in Curriculum Design: A Delphi Study Milena Staykova, Melissa Marszalek, Shanice Vennable, Dustin Whitaker.
From Evidence to Action: Addressing Challenges to Knowledge Translation in RHAs The Need to Know Team Meeting May 30, 2005.
Public Health Tiger Team we will start the meeting 3 min after the hour DRAFT Project Charter May 6, 2014.
Michael F. Huerta, Ph.D. Associate Director for Program Development National Library of Medicine, NIH BD2K CDE Webinar – September 8, 2015 Common Data.
Public Health in Health IT Standardization Resource Center Current experience with implementation of public health information systems. HIT Adoption Stories.
EHR-S Functional Requirements IG: Lab Results Interface Laboratory Initiative.
State HIE Program Chris Muir Program Manager for Western/Mid-western States.
Interoperability Framework Overview Health Information Technology (HIT) Standards Committee June 24, 2010 Presented by: Douglas Fridsma, MD, PhD Acting.
Longitudinal Coordination of Care LCP SWG Thursday July 18, 2013.
Public Health Tiger Team we will start the meeting 3 min after the hour DRAFT Project Charter April 15, 2014.
10/27/111 Longitudinal Care Work Group (LCWG) Proposal to Re-Scope and Re-Name the LTPAC WG.
S&I Standards Organization Engagement & Communication Plan DRAFT Standards Support Team 1 September 2011.
Collaborative Networks for Conducting Comparative Effectiveness Research Tuesday September 9, :00 – 9:30 am.
A Team Members Guide to a Culture of Safety
The Science of Public Reporting September 10, 2012 AHRQ 2012 Annual Conference Lunch & Learn Session Celeste Torio, PhD, MPH Staff Service Fellow AHRQ.
Electronic Clinical Quality Measures – Session #1 ONC Resource Center.
S&I FRAMEWORK PROPOSED INITIATIVE SUMMARIES Dr. Douglas Fridsma Office of Interoperability and Standards December 10, 2010.
Patient Engagement throughout the Biopharmaceutical Lifecycle: Tips for Effective Patient Advocate/Industry Collaboration to Improve Patient Access and.
PRAGMATIC Study Designs: Elderly Cancer Trials
RCSLT Outcomes Project TOMs CONNECT 17th November 2016
The AHRQ Safety Program for Improving Antibiotic Use
Michele M. Monti, MS, MPH Environmental Health Tracking Branch
Health Workforce Innovations to Support Delivery System Transformation
Biopharma Breakout Goals
Person Centeredness in Quality Measurement
Comprehensive, Collaborative System of Crisis and Emergency Care
Lou Diamond, MB, ChB, FACP Moderator
MeHI Connected Communities Program
Using Administrative Data for Federal Program Evaluation
Executive Overview.
The FDA Early Feasibility Study Pilot and the Innovation Pathway
Federal Health IT Ontology Project (HITOP) Group
CDRH 2010 Strategic Priorities
NSF INCLUDES – DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT LAUNCH PILOTS
European Network on teacher Education Policies
RCSLT Outcomes Project TOMs CONNECT 17th November 2016
Measuring Project Performance: Tips and Tools to Showcase Your Results
Getting Started with Your Malnutrition Quality Improvement Project
Introduction to TransCelerate
Strategic & Operational Planning:
PCORTF Common Data Model Harmonization Project and the Oncology Use case January 30, 2018.
2017 Health care Preparedness and Response Draft Capabilities
A Training Design Tool for Stakeholders Tasked with Evaluating New and Innovative Treatment Technologies for Small Drinking Water Systems Be sure to type.
ONC P2 FHIR Ecosystem Task Force
Danica Marinac-Dabic, MD, PhD, MMSc, FISPE
Women’s Health Technologies CRN
2018 OSEP Project Directors’ Conference
Progress Report on the Patient Reported Outcomes Harmonization Team
Pelvic Organ Prolapse Working Group
September 7, 2018 Scott Chudnoff
Comparing Options for Management:PAtient-centered REsults for Uterine Fibroids Evan R. Myers, MD, MPH Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Duke Clinical.
Introduction to TransCelerate
Systemic Student Support (S3) Academy
_ Update Seth Blumenthal, MBA Director, Data & Innovation PCPI
Carolina Mendoza-Puccini, MD
ULTRA (Uterine Leiomyoma Treatment with Radiofrequency Ablation)
NACDEP Annual Conference, June 11, 2018
Evaluating Devices Using Claims and Registry Data (EDUCATe)
Shatterproof Rating System for Addiction Treatment Program
State and Regional Demonstrations of Health IT
Regulatory Perspective of the Use of EHRs in RCTs
EUnetHTA Assembly May 2018.
MODULE 11: Creating a TSMO Program Plan
Getting Knowledge into Action for Healthcare Quality
Presentation transcript:

September 7, 2018 Courtney Baird, MS MDEpiNet Women’s Health Technologies CRN: Overview of Objectives and Workstreams September 7, 2018 Courtney Baird, MS

Outline Review of WHT-CRN Project Objectives Key WHT-CRN Project Deliverables WHT-CRN Federal Partners and their Roles Timeline of Key Activities Overview of Process used to Identify the Core Minimum Data Elements

Overall Project Objectives Funding granted from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund (PCORTF) Help establish a strategically coordinated registry network (CRN) for women’s health technologies and develop tools to facilitate collection of data within the existing and new registries by leveraging clinical care data

Overall Project Objectives Demonstrate that data in these registries can be used to do the following: Evaluate the effectiveness, quality of life and safety associated with differing treatment options Assess the effectiveness and quality of life associated with varying treatment options Provide a framework for clinical studies to be conducted within the registry, including industry-sponsored studies required to fulfill the FDA’s request for pre-market and post-market regulatory activities Allow healthcare providers to track surgeon volume, patient outcomes, and quality measures for quality improvement activities and fulfill upcoming Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS), Physician Quality and Reporting Systems (PQRS) and maintenance of certification requirements

Overall Project Objectives Build a Strategically Coordinated Registry Network (CRN) to improve evaluation of women’s health technologies across multiple care settings Single Purpose Registries Coordinated Registry Network for Women’s Health Technologies Singular focus (one area) Time/Cost-intensive Challenging to address questions involving multiple therapies Stand-alone design: Challenges with interoperability due to registry-specific data collection / normalization Support assessment of real world combinations of care for Uterine fibroids Pelvic Floor disorders (pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence) Sterilization/LARC (long acting reversible contraceptives) Harmonized, interoperable platform to support standardized data capture Address priority research questions from stakeholders Improve longitudinal evidence generation and reduce cost

Overall Project Deliverables CRN for Women’s Health Technologies Core Leadership: FDA | ONC | NLM | AHRQ | MDEpiNet Core Activities Overall Project Coordination Develop data sharing framework, CRN metadata, analysis Data source quality and reliability analysis Develop linkage platform across datasets Develop sustainability plan Analyze priority CRN research questions Multi-stakeholder Clinical Groups: Identify Core Datasets for their clinical area and support validation for the WHT-CRN common dataset Uterine Fibroids Working Group Pelvic Floor Disorders Working Group Sterilization/LARC Working Group Cross-Functional Activities Clinical Working Groups | Informatics Working Group Harmonize and standardize minimal core datasets (with clinical groups), leveraging unique device identification (UDI) and GUDID Develop HL7 FHIR Profiles and structured data capture methods to extract core datasets captured in routine care for use in the CRN Conduct feasibility pilots to evaluate the ability of the CRN to address clinical questions

WHT-CRN Key Activities (High-level) Identification of Core Data Elements for each WHT-CRN clinical area Harmonize and Standardize CDEs for WHT-CRN Standards Development Develop data standards exchange specifications Tool Development and Implementation Pilot: Evaluate WHT-CRN’s ability to address priority questions from stakeholders

WHT-CRN Key Activities (High-level) CWG Session Focus: Each clinical working group (CWG) will present their core data elements, goals for how the dataset will be used, and next steps. Identification of Core Data Elements for each WHT-CRN clinical area Harmonize and Standardize CDEs for WHT-CRN Standards Development Develop data standards exchange specifications Tool Development and Implementation Pilot: Evaluate WHT-CRN’s ability to address priority questions from stakeholders

Process used to Identify the Core Minimum Data Elements For each clinical working group: A group of experts was convened and selected from professional society leaders, the FDA, academia and industry. An initial set of data elements was created from a review of the literature, regulatory requirements, and existing research efforts. A formal 2-3 round Delphi Method was employed to narrow down the list and achieve consensus on a core minimum dataset.

Delphi Process Overview Challenges with a traditional consensus panel approach: One person with strong personality can have a large effect on the decision Lack of anonymity may introduce bias Delphi Method The Delphi process was developed to achieve consensus while minimizing bias from group dynamics and face-to-face responses Group input is received through anonymous surveys Provides an opportunity for group members to introduce new options and suggestions in between rounds Results are analyzed to identify responses with strong consensus (e.g. >70%). Options that lack consensus automatically dropped (<50%) Multiple rounds until consensus achieved

Delphi Process Overview A series of questionnaires were sent to the panel and answered by each expert anonymously and individually. The answers from each questionnaire were collected, collated and analyzed by a study design team from Weill Cornell Medicine. Questions for the next round were based on the analysis process and were discussed with group members via conference call. This process was repeated 2-3 times until a group consensus was reached.

Delphi Process and Harmonization/Coordination – Next Phase Registry 3 Registry 4 Registry 2 Registry 1 Common data elements Common Forms Common consent and participation rules Common data access rules See deck – this could be last slide – a reminder that there will be phase 2 for Delphi that results separate registries but a common framework/agreement re common data to be collected/made accessible.    As a project team, we need to work with the registries to make sure we have a clear (common) understanding of how that phase 2 involvement and review will take place.   Most important is the final signoff for the common product.

Thank you.