The "Honest Broker" method of integrating interdisciplinary research data.

Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings / AMIA Symposium. AMIA Symposium 02/2005;
Source: PubMed


Multiple clinical informatics systems have been developed within separate departments of the University of Michigan Medical School. We are in the process of creating an "Honest Broker" method of safely and securely linking together data from different clinical systems for a research project studying the co-morbidity of depression and cardiovascular disease. The Michigan Clinical Research Collaboratory (MCRC) is an NIH/NHLBI Roadmap initiative funded to re-engineer the clinical research enterprise.

Download full-text


Available from: Andrew Dallas Boyd
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Honest broker services are essential for tissue- and data-based research. The honest broker provides a firewall between clinical and research activities. Clinical information is stripped of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-denoted personal health identifiers. Research material may have linkage codes, precluding the identification of patients to researchers. The honest broker provides data derived from clinical and research sources. These data are for research use only, and there are rules in place that prohibit reidentification. Very rarely, the institutional review board (IRB) may allow recontact and develop a recontact plan with the honest broker. Certain databases are structured to serve a clinical and research function and incorporate 'real-time' updating of information. This complex process needs resolution of a variety of issues regarding the precise role of the HB and their interaction with data. There also is an obvious need for software solutions to make the task of deidentification easier. The University of Pittsburgh has implemented a novel, IRB-approved mechanism to address honest broker functions to meet the specimen and data needs of researchers. The Tissue Bank stores biologic specimens. The Cancer Registry culls data and annotating information as part of state- and federal-mandated functions and collects data on the clinical progression, treatment, and outcomes of cancer patients. The Cancer Registry also has additional IRB approval to collect data elements only for research purposes. The Clinical Outcomes Group is involved in patient safety and health services research. Radiation Oncology and Medical Oncology provide critical treatment related information. Pathology and Oncology Informatics have designed software tools for querying availability of specimens, extracting data, and deidentifying specimens and annotating data for clinical and translational research. These entities partnered and submitted a joint IRB proposal to create an institutional honest broker facility. The employees of this conglomerate have honest broker agreements with the University of Pittsburgh and the Medical Center. This provides a large group of honest brokers, ensuring availability for projects without any conflict of interest. The honest broker system has been an IRB-approved institutional entity at the University of Pittsburgh since 2003. The honest broker system currently includes 33 certified honest brokers encompassing the multiple partners of this system. The honest broker system has handled >1600 requests over the past 4 years with a 25% increase in volume each year. The current results indicate that the collaborative honest broker model described herein is robust and provides a highly functional solution to the specimen and data needs for critical clinical and translational research activities.
    Full-text · Article · Oct 2008 · Cancer
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Clinical Research Informatics, an emerging sub-domain of Biomedical Informatics, is currently not well defined. A formal description of CRI including major challenges and opportunities is needed to direct progress in the field. Given the early stage of CRI knowledge and activity, we engaged in a series of qualitative studies with key stakeholders and opinion leaders to determine the range of challenges and opportunities facing CRI. These phases employed complimentary methods to triangulate upon our findings. Study phases included: 1) a group interview with key stakeholders, 2) an email follow-up survey with a larger group of self-identified CRI professionals, and 3) validation of our results via electronic peer-debriefing and member-checking with a group of CRI-related opinion leaders. Data were collected, transcribed, and organized for formal, independent content analyses by experienced qualitative investigators, followed by an iterative process to identify emergent categorizations and thematic descriptions of the data. We identified a range of challenges and opportunities facing the CRI domain. These included 13 distinct themes spanning academic, practical, and organizational aspects of CRI. These findings also informed the development of a formal definition of CRI and supported further representations that illustrate areas of emphasis critical to advancing the domain. CRI has emerged as a distinct discipline that faces multiple challenges and opportunities. The findings presented summarize those challenges and opportunities and provide a framework that should help inform next steps to advance this important new discipline.
    Full-text · Article · Apr 2009 · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Over the past 20 years, imaging informatics has been driven by the widespread adoption of radiology information and picture archiving and communication and speech recognition systems. These three clinical information systems are commonplace and are intuitive to most radiologists as they replicate familiar paper and film workflow. So what is next? There is a surge of innovation in imaging informatics around advanced workflow, search, electronic medical record aggregation, dashboarding, and analytics tools for quality measures (Nance et al., AJR Am J Roentgenol 200:1064-1070, 2013). The challenge lies in not having to rebuild the technological wheel for each of these new applications but instead attempt to share common components through open standards and modern development techniques. The next generation of applications will be built with moving parts that work together to satisfy advanced use cases without replicating databases and without requiring fragile, intense synchronization from clinical systems. The purpose of this paper is to identify building blocks that can position a practice to be able to quickly innovate when addressing clinical, educational, and research-related problems. This paper is the result of identifying common components in the construction of over two dozen clinical informatics projects developed at the University of Maryland Radiology Informatics Research Laboratory. The systems outlined are intended as a mere foundation rather than an exhaustive list of possible extensions.
    Full-text · Article · Oct 2013 · Journal of Digital Imaging