» Articles » PMID: 39405525

Application of Spatial Analysis on Electronic Health Records to Characterize Patient Phenotypes: Systematic Review

Overview
Journal JMIR Med Inform
Publisher JMIR Publications
Date 2024 Oct 15
PMID 39405525
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Electronic health records (EHRs) commonly contain patient addresses that provide valuable data for geocoding and spatial analysis, enabling more comprehensive descriptions of individual patients for clinical purposes. Despite the widespread use of EHRs in clinical decision support and interventions, no systematic review has examined the extent to which spatial analysis is used to characterize patient phenotypes.

Objective: This study reviews advanced spatial analyses that used individual-level health data from EHRs within the United States to characterize patient phenotypes.

Methods: We systematically evaluated English-language, peer-reviewed studies from the PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases from inception to August 20, 2023, without imposing constraints on study design or specific health domains.

Results: A substantial proportion of studies (>85%) were limited to geocoding or basic mapping without implementing advanced spatial statistical analysis, leaving only 49 studies that met the eligibility criteria. These studies used diverse spatial methods, with a predominant focus on clustering techniques, while spatiotemporal analysis (frequentist and Bayesian) and modeling were less common. A noteworthy surge (n=42, 86%) in publications was observed after 2017. The publications investigated a variety of adult and pediatric clinical areas, including infectious disease, endocrinology, and cardiology, using phenotypes defined over a range of data domains such as demographics, diagnoses, and visits. The primary health outcomes investigated were asthma, hypertension, and diabetes. Notably, patient phenotypes involving genomics, imaging, and notes were limited.

Conclusions: This review underscores the growing interest in spatial analysis of EHR-derived data and highlights knowledge gaps in clinical health, phenotype domains, and spatial methodologies. We suggest that future research should focus on addressing these gaps and harnessing spatial analysis to enhance individual patient contexts and clinical decision support.

References
1.
Lipner E, Knox D, French J, Rudman J, Strong M, Crooks J . A Geospatial Epidemiologic Analysis of Nontuberculous Mycobacterial Infection: An Ecological Study in Colorado. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2017; 14(10):1523-1532. PMC: 5718570. DOI: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201701-081OC. View

2.
Simpson C, Novak L . Place matters: the problems and possibilities of spatial data in electronic health records. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2014; 2013:1303-11. PMC: 3900146. View

3.
Carter A, Nguyen C . A comparison of cancer burden and research spending reveals discrepancies in the distribution of research funding. BMC Public Health. 2012; 12:526. PMC: 3411479. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-526. View

4.
Pearson D, Werth V . Geospatial Correlation of Amyopathic Dermatomyositis With Fixed Sources of Airborne Pollution: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Front Med (Lausanne). 2019; 6:85. PMC: 6491706. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2019.00085. View

5.
Kuo A, Dang S . Secure Messaging in Electronic Health Records and Its Impact on Diabetes Clinical Outcomes: A Systematic Review. Telemed J E Health. 2016; 22(9):769-77. DOI: 10.1089/tmj.2015.0207. View