Dataset Information

Quality Assurance of Health Wearables Data: Participatory Workshop on Barriers, Solutions, and Expectations.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The ubiquity of health wearables and the consequent production of patient-generated health data (PGHD) are rapidly escalating. However, the utilization of PGHD in routine clinical practices is still low because of data quality issues. There is no agreed approach to PGHD quality assurance; therefore, realizing the promise of PGHD requires in-depth discussion among diverse stakeholders to identify the data quality assurance challenges they face and understand their needs for PGHD quality assurance. OBJECTIVE:This paper reports findings from a workshop aimed to explore stakeholders' data quality challenges, identify their needs and expectations, and offer practical solutions. METHODS:A qualitative multi-stakeholder workshop was conducted as a half-day event on the campus of an Australian University located in a major health care precinct, namely the Melbourne Parkville Precinct. The 18 participants had experience of PGHD use in clinical care, including people who identified as health care consumers, clinical care providers, wearables suppliers, and health information specialists. Data collection was done by facilitators capturing written notes of the proceedings as attendees engaged in participatory design activities in written and oral formats, using a range of whole-group and small-group interactive methods. The collected data were analyzed thematically, using deductive and inductive coding. RESULTS:The participants' discussions revealed a range of technical, behavioral, operational, and organizational challenges surrounding PGHD, from the time when data are collected by patients to the time data are used by health care providers for clinical decision making. PGHD stakeholders found consensus on training and engagement needs, continuous collaboration among stakeholders, and development of technical and policy standards to assure PGHD quality. CONCLUSIONS:Assuring PGHD quality is a complex process that requires the contribution of all PGHD stakeholders. The variety and depth of inputs in our workshop highlighted the importance of co-designing guidance for PGHD quality guidance.

SUBMITTER: Abdolkhani R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7003125 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Quality Assurance of Health Wearables Data: Participatory Workshop on Barriers, Solutions, and Expectations.

Abdolkhani Robab R Gray Kathleen K Borda Ann A DeSouza Ruth R

JMIR mHealth and uHealth 20200122 1

<h4>Background</h4>The ubiquity of health wearables and the consequent production of patient-generated health data (PGHD) are rapidly escalating. However, the utilization of PGHD in routine clinical practices is still low because of data quality issues. There is no agreed approach to PGHD quality assurance; therefore, realizing the promise of PGHD requires in-depth discussion among diverse stakeholders to identify the data quality assurance challenges they face and understand their needs for PGH ...[more]

PMID: 32012090

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Next generation sequencing (NGS) is becoming widely used among diagnostics and research laboratories, and nowadays it is applied to a variety of disciplines, including veterinary virology. The NGS workflow comprises several steps, namely sample processing, library preparation, sequencing and primary/secondary/tertiary bioinformatics (BI) analyses. The latter is constituted by a complex process extremely difficult to standardize, due to the variety of tools and metrics available. Thus, it is of the utmost importance to assess the comparability of results obtained through different methods and in different laboratories. To achieve this goal, we have organized a proficiency test focused on the bioinformatics components for the generation of complete genome sequences of salmonid rhabdoviruses. METHODS:Three partners, that performed virus sequencing using different commercial library preparation kits and NGS platforms, gathered together and shared with each other 75 raw datasets which were analyzed separately by the participants to produce a consensus sequence according to their own bioinformatics pipeline. Results were then compared to highlight discrepancies, and a subset of inconsistencies were investigated more in detail. RESULTS:In total, we observed 526 discrepancies, of which 39.5% were located at genome termini, 14.1% at intergenic regions and 46.4% at coding regions. Among these, 10 SNPs and 99 indels caused changes in the protein products. Overall reproducibility was 99.94%. Based on the analysis of a subset of inconsistencies investigated more in-depth, manual curation appeared the most critical step affecting sequence comparability, suggesting that the harmonization of this phase is crucial to obtain comparable results. The analysis of a calibrator sample allowed assessing BI accuracy, being 99.983%. CONCLUSIONS:We demonstrated the applicability and the usefulness of BI proficiency testing to assure the quality of NGS data, and recommend a wider implementation of such exercises to guarantee sequence data uniformity among different virology laboratories.

Project description:IntroductionThe quality of tuberculosis laboratory services in health facilities is a mandatory component of detecting active pulmonary TB cases and treatment follow-up. However, ensuring the quality of laboratory test results is a concern. This study aimed to assess the quality assurance practices in the tuberculosis diagnostic health facilities of Ethiopia.Materials and methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted from October 2018 to March 2019 at nine governmental TB-culture laboratories and 34 randomly selected GeneXpert® MTB/RIF (Xpert® MTB/RIF) testing health facilities in Ethiopia. Participating health facilities were interviewed and laboratory documents and records present since 2017 were observed. Prior to the data collection, training was given to the data collectors. Descriptive statistics were used to produce results and were presented with tables and graphs.ResultsFrom a total of 34 Xpert® MTB/RIF testing laboratories, 50% run Internal Quality Control (IQC) for Acid-Fast Bacillus (AFB) Microscopy and 67.6% had lot-to-lot verification of staining reagents. For the Xpert® MTB/RIF assay, a lot-to-lot verification of cartridge and method validation was performed only in 8.8%and 20.6% of Xpert® MTB/RIF testing laboratories respectively. All TB-culture laboratories included in the study ran negative control (start and end IQC) during TB-culture sample processing and performed lot-to-lot verification for Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) in 88.9% of TB-culture laboratories. External Quality Assessment (EQA) Proficiency Testing (PT) for AFB microscopy is practiced in 79.4% Xpert® MTB/RIF testing laboratories and 100.0% for the Xpert® MTB/RIF assay. TB-Culture PT participation practice among TB-culture laboratories was 88.9%. A major challenge for health facilities during PT participation was the AFB PT-sample transportation delay (40.7%) and the Xpert® MTB/RIF assay EQA-PT feedback missing (38.2%).ConclusionThis assessment reveals that IQC for AFB microscopy, lot-to-lot verification, method validation, and equipment calibration were not well-practiced. The majority of TB diagnostic health facility laboratories had EQA-PT participation practice, but a significant gap in PT-sample transportation and missing feedback was identified.

Project description:Background:Several typologies and guidelines are available to address the methodological and practical considerations required in mental health research. However, few studies have actually attempted to systematically identify and synthesise these considerations. This paper provides an integrative review that identifies and synthesises the available research evidence on mental health research methodological considerations. Methods:A search of the published literature was conducted using EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus. The search was limited to papers published in English for the timeframe 2000-2018. Using pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, three reviewers independently screened the retrieved papers. A data extraction form was used to extract data from the included papers. Results:Of 27 papers meeting the inclusion criteria, 13 focused on qualitative research, 8 mixed methods and 6 papers focused on quantitative methodology. A total of 14 papers targeted global mental health research, with 2 papers each describing studies in Germany, Sweden and China. The review identified several methodological considerations relating to study design, methods, data collection, and quality assurance. Methodological issues regarding the study design included assembling team members, familiarisation and sharing information on the topic, and seeking the contribution of team members. Methodological considerations to facilitate data collection involved adequate preparation prior to fieldwork, appropriateness and adequacy of the sampling and data collection approach, selection of consumers, the social or cultural context, practical and organisational skills; and ethical and sensitivity issues. Conclusion:The evidence confirms that studies on methodological considerations in conducting mental health research largely focus on qualitative studies in a transcultural setting, as well as recommendations derived from multi-site surveys. Mental health research should adequately consider the methodological issues around study design, sampling, data collection procedures and quality assurance in order to maintain the quality of data collection.

Project description:BackgroundCommunity health workers (CHWs) play an important role in improving access to services in areas with limited health infrastructure or workforce. Supervision of CHWs by qualified health professionals is the main link between this lay workforce and the formal health system. The quality of services provided by lay health workers is dependent on adequate supportive supervision. It is however one of the weakest links in CHW programs due to logistical and resource constraints, especially in large scale programs. Interventions such as point of care testing using malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) require real time monitoring to ensure diagnostic accuracy. In this study, we evaluated the utility of a mobile health technology platform to remotely monitor malaria RDT (mRDT) testing by CHWs for quality improvement.MethodsAs part of a large implementation trial involving mRDT testing by CHWs, we introduced the Fionet system composed of a mobile device (Deki Reader, DR) to assist in processing and automated interpretation of mRDTs, which connects to a cloud-based database which captures reports from the field in real time, displaying results in a custom dashboard of key performance indicators. A random sample of 100 CHWs were trained and provided with the Deki Readers and instructed to use it on 10 successive patients. The CHWs interpretation was compared with the Deki Reader's automatic interpretation, with the errors in processing and interpreting the RDTs recorded. After the CHW entered their interpretation on the DR, the DR provided immediate, automated feedback and interpretation based on its reading of the same cassette. The study team monitored the CHW performance remotely and provided additional support.ResultsA total of 1251 primary and 113 repeat tests were performed by the 97 CHWs who used the DR. 91.6% of the tests had agreement between the DR and the CHWs. There were 61 (4.9%) processing and 52 (4.2%) interpretation errors among the primary tests. There was a tendency towards lower odds of errors with increasing number and frequency of tests, though not statistically significant. Of the 62 tests that were repeated due to errors, 79% achieved concordance between the CHW and the DR. Satisfaction with the use of the DR by the CHWs was high.ConclusionsUse of innovative mHealth strategies for monitoring and quality control can ensure quality within a large scale implementation of community level testing by lay health workers.

Project description:Given the importance of microbiology results on patient care, high quality standards are expected. Internal quality assurance (IQA) could mitigate the limitations of internal quality control, competency assessment and external quality assurance, adding a longitudinal insight, including pre- and post-analytical steps. Here, we implemented an IQA program in our clinical microbiology facilities with blind resubmission of routine samples during 22 months. One-hundred-and-twenty-one out of 123 (98.4%) serological analyses and 112 out of 122 (91.8%) molecular analyses were concordant. Among the discordances in molecular biology analyses, 6 results were low positive samples that turned out negative, likely due to stochastic repartition of nucleic acids. Moreover, one identified retranscription error led us to implement automated results transmission from the Applied Biosystems instruments to the laboratory information system (LIS). Regarding Gram stain microscopy, 560 out of 745 (75.2%) of compared parameters were concordant. As many as 67 out of 84 (79.8%) pairs of culture results were similar, including 16 sterile pairs, 27 having identical identification or description and semi-quantification and 24 only showing variations in semi-quantification with identical description or identification of colonies. Seventeen pairs had diverging identification or description of colonies. Culture was twice only done for one member of the pairs. Regarding antibiotic susceptibility testing, a major discrepancy was observed in 5 out of 48 results (10.4%). In conclusion, serological tests were highly reproducible. Molecular diagnosis also revealed to be robust except when the amounts of nucleic acids present in the sample were close to the limits of detection. Conventional microbiology was less robust with major discrepancies reaching 39.5% of the samples for microscopy. Similarly, culture and antibiotic susceptibility testing were prone to discrepancies. This work was ground for reconsidering multiples aspects of our practices and demonstrates the importance of IQA to complete the other quality management procedures.

Dataset Information

Quality Assurance of Health Wearables Data: Participatory Workshop on Barriers, Solutions, and Expectations.

Publications

Quality Assurance of Health Wearables Data: Participatory Workshop on Barriers, Solutions, and Expectations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets