Objective:To comprehensively evaluate the application of Common Data Model (CDM) of Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) in China, and provide reference for the implementation of data standardization and evidence sharing in China.Methods:PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, WanFang and SinoMed databases were used for literature retrieval to collect the research papers of OMOP CDM application for data standardization in China until March 15, 2023. The information about institutions, types and numbers of patients were extracted.Results:A total of 14 research papers, including 9 in English and 5 in Chinese, were selected. The research papers published since 2018 were collected, which focused on patients with hypertension, diabetes, and depression. A total of 12 institutions or platforms transformed data into OMOP CDM. Jiangsu Provincial People's Hospital was the first one to apply the CDM and demonstrated its feasibility in China. Additionally, the regional information system in Yinzhou District of Ningbo, Zhejiang Province, standardized the multi-dimensional data of patients with diabetes and hypertension. Based on this platform, a series of prediction models for complications in patients with diabetes were constructed. Another major database in Beijing Anding Hospital applied OMOP CDM to analyze the characteristics of patients with late-life depression and dementia.Conclusions:This study analyzed the application of OMOP CDM in China. Through in-depth analysis of specific cases, the study provided guidance for the future cross-regional evidence sharing and collaboration.

Objective:To comprehensively evaluate the application of Common Data Model (CDM) of Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) in China, and provide reference for the implementation of data standardization and evidence sharing in China.Methods:PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, WanFang and SinoMed databases were used for literature retrieval to collect the research papers of OMOP CDM application for data standardization in China until March 15, 2023. The information about institutions, types and numbers of patients were extracted.Results:A total of 14 research papers, including 9 in English and 5 in Chinese, were selected. The research papers published since 2018 were collected, which focused on patients with hypertension, diabetes, and depression. A total of 12 institutions or platforms transformed data into OMOP CDM. Jiangsu Provincial People's Hospital was the first one to apply the CDM and demonstrated its feasibility in China. Additionally, the regional information system in Yinzhou District of Ningbo, Zhejiang Province, standardized the multi-dimensional data of patients with diabetes and hypertension. Based on this platform, a series of prediction models for complications in patients with diabetes were constructed. Another major database in Beijing Anding Hospital applied OMOP CDM to analyze the characteristics of patients with late-life depression and dementia.Conclusions:This study analyzed the application of OMOP CDM in China. Through in-depth analysis of specific cases, the study provided guidance for the future cross-regional evidence sharing and collaboration.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: 2018 ESC/ESH Hypertension guideline recommends 2-drug combination as initial anti-hypertensive therapy. However, real-world evidence for effectiveness of recommended regimens remains limited. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of first-line anti-hypertensive treatment combining 2 out of the following classes: angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors/angiotensin-receptor blocker (A), calcium channel blocker (C), and thiazide-type diuretics (D). METHODS: Treatment-naïve hypertensive adults without cardiovascular disease (CVD) who initiated dual anti-hypertensive medications were identified in 5 databases from US and Korea. The patients were matched for each comparison set by large-scale propensity score matching. Primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events as a composite outcome comprised the secondary measure. RESULTS: A total of 987,983 patients met the eligibility criteria. After matching, 222,686, 32,344, and 38,513 patients were allocated to A+C vs. A+D, C+D vs. A+C, and C+D vs. A+D comparison, respectively. There was no significant difference in the mortality during total of 1,806,077 person-years: A+C vs. A+D (hazard ratio [HR], 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97−1.20; p=0.127), C+D vs. A+C (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87−1.01; p=0.067), and C+D vs. A+D (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.95−1.47; p=0.104). A+C was associated with a slightly higher risk of heart failure (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.01−1.18; p=0.040) and stroke (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01−1.17; p=0.040) than A+D. CONCLUSIONS There was no significant difference in mortality among A+C, A+D, and C+D combination treatment in patients without previous CVD. This finding was consistent across multi-national heterogeneous cohorts in real-world practice.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: 2018 ESC/ESH Hypertension guideline recommends 2-drug combination as initial anti-hypertensive therapy. However, real-world evidence for effectiveness of recommended regimens remains limited. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of first-line anti-hypertensive treatment combining 2 out of the following classes: angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors/angiotensin-receptor blocker (A), calcium channel blocker (C), and thiazide-type diuretics (D).METHODS: Treatment-naïve hypertensive adults without cardiovascular disease (CVD) who initiated dual anti-hypertensive medications were identified in 5 databases from US and Korea. The patients were matched for each comparison set by large-scale propensity score matching. Primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events as a composite outcome comprised the secondary measure.RESULTS: A total of 987,983 patients met the eligibility criteria. After matching, 222,686, 32,344, and 38,513 patients were allocated to A+C vs. A+D, C+D vs. A+C, and C+D vs. A+D comparison, respectively. There was no significant difference in the mortality during total of 1,806,077 person-years: A+C vs. A+D (hazard ratio [HR], 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97−1.20; p=0.127), C+D vs. A+C (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87−1.01; p=0.067), and C+D vs. A+D (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.95−1.47; p=0.104). A+C was associated with a slightly higher risk of heart failure (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.01−1.18; p=0.040) and stroke (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01−1.17; p=0.040) than A+D.CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in mortality among A+C, A+D, and C+D combination treatment in patients without previous CVD. This finding was consistent across multi-national heterogeneous cohorts in real-world practice.
Adult ; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists ; Antihypertensive Agents ; Calcium Channel Blockers ; Calcium Channels ; Cardiovascular Diseases ; Cohort Studies ; Diuretics ; Heart Failure ; Humans ; Hypertension ; Korea ; Mortality ; Myocardial Infarction ; Propensity Score ; Stroke