We are currently in the process of delivering OMOP-based reporting mechanism for the lung-cancer quality indicators within this publication. It’s guideline-based, but just for the subset that have been specifically filtered to indicators that are measurable and actionable within routinely collected data.
I’ve also created a mapping for each of the included indicators to their constituent numerators and denominators if anyone is interested in something that is relatively concretely defined? Can’t join the call as it is 3am Australia time, but happy to connect asynchronously if anyone is interested. We are currently working on an equivalent set for head and neck cancer that is a bit more ambitious, as it includes supportive-care utilisation factors (in particular, dietetic and speech interventions for high needs population) as well.
Thank you all for the tremendous discussion about guideline-driven evidence generation opportunities that our community can collaborate on together. On today’s community call (Jan28 11amET Community Calls – OHDSI), we will be hearing from several collaborators to learn more about their ideas.
We will be using your responses to help prioritize the study opportunities and determine which studies we will focus on collectively during our OHDSI community calls over the next several months.
I would like to contribute to this informative discussion (probably a little belated though).
My area of interest is the treatment of uveal melanoma, a rare tumor. While there are treatment guidelines (including NCCN) recommending radiation therapy as the first-line approach in most cases, there is limited evidence comparing the effectiveness of various treatment options, such as brachytherapy, stereotactic radiosurgery, and proton beam irradiation.
Another crucial aspect to address is the rate of complications following uveal melanoma irradiation (e.g., secondary glaucoma, maculopathy, retinopathy, opticopathy), as well as how to manage these complications. Currently, two main treatments are used: anti-VEGF injections and glucocorticoids, but there is no clear evidence supporting one over the another. Furthermore, the optimal duration and administration regimen for these treatments remain unclear. Observational data could provide valuable insights into these issues.
Some potential research objectives include:
Comparing complication rates following different irradiation treatments, adjusted for tumor size and localization.
Comparing the effectiveness of anti-VEGF injections and glucocorticoids in treating and preventing complications.
I believe that applying Real-World Evidence approaches to the study of rare tumors could be highly beneficial, and I would be interested in collaborating on such research.
P.S. Unfortunately, I lost access to my previous forum profile and had to create a new one.
I am sorry I am coming into this discussion a bit late, perhaps. The team of clinician researchers that I work with would be very interested in this work on CAP. Has there been a meeting or any further discussions regarding this?
I am sorry I meant Community-acquired Pneumonia when I wrote CAP.
We are in the middle of a very busy period in our project but I will get in touch with the pneumonia researchers in our project and try to jump onto the fast-moving train, as you suggest.
Never too late! Where we are at right now is that we created cohorts and assessed cohorts for CAP and drugs of interest. Next steps are to write the protocol and specification. The first draft will be available shortly and will be shared in the MS channel. I tagged you there so that you can easily find it.
Where we are at right now is that we created cohorts and assessed cohorts for CAP and drugs of interest. Next steps are to write the protocol and specification. The first draft will be available shortly and will be shared in the