It doesn’t look like OMOP includes a structure to store patient contact information like name and phone number to be used for recruitment. Is there another standard that others would recommend?
Would you want store PHI in your system?
Yes, we’d like to store PHI in separate but secure structure to be used as a compliment to the OMOP data.
Colorado extends the Person table to include a name field. Since it is NOT proper OMOP, this field won’t ever be used in a network query or available for use in Atlas, but it is available for our Bi-devlopers to write SQL to retrieve the data.
We have extended OMOP to include a structure for this data. I will have my colleague post the structure here. (It really should be submitted formally - and we will do that as soon as we can).
I am curious, what is the use case for storing PHI?
The All of Us Research program has extended the OMOP CDM to include PHI tables. Since this includes a large number of institutions with an already done implementation, it would be great if it could be adopted as a blessed standard/extension. Maybe not part of the core CDM but a sanctioned plugin.
@cukarthik Let me know if it is OK to share the All of Us PHI DDL.
@dave.barman PHI could be used to generate a hash and link records across institutions or to contact patients to take a survey.
Please bring it to the CDM Working Group and write a proposal here. Don’t forget the use cases!!
OMOP CDM has the structure to store contact information. It should be stored in Observation table. The concept_id are following:
42869483 (Personnel Fax number)
42869484 (Personnel Email address)
42869482 (Personnel Business phone number)
42869479 (Personnel Cell phone number)
42869480 (Personnel Home phone number)
and there are more…
The actual phone number or email address are stored in the value_as_string field.
and patient name is stored in observation_concept_id: 4161172 (Patient name).