The common data model (CDM) has found widespread application in healthcare studies, but its utilization in cancer research has been limited. This article describes the development and implementation strategy for Cancer Clinical Library Databases (CCLDs), which are standardized cancer-specific databases established under the Korea-Clinical Data Utilization Network for Research Excellence (K-CURE) project by the Korean Ministry of Health and Welfare. Fifteen leading hospitals and fourteen academic associations in Korea are engaged in constructing CCLDs for 10 primary cancer types. For each cancer type-specific CCLD, cancer data experts determine key clinical data items essential for cancer research, standardize these items across cancer types, and create a standardized schema. Comprehensive clinical records covering diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes, with annual updates, are collected for each cancer patient in the target population, and quality control is based on six-sigma standards. To protect patient privacy, CCLDs follow stringent data security guidelines by pseudonymizing personal identification information and operating within a closed analysis environment. Researchers can apply for access to CCLD data through the K-CURE portal, which is subject to Institutional Review Board and Data Review Board approval. The CCLD is considered a pioneering standardized cancer-specific database, significantly representing Korea’s cancer data. It is expected to overcome limitations of previous CDMs and provide a valuable resource for multicenter cancer research in Korea.

This study explored the evolving trends in pediatric dentistry research, focusing on the changes in research trends in the Journal of the Korean Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (JKAPD) and comparing them with those in other international journals and previous studies. We selected the JKAPD (Korea), Pediatric Dentistry (PD, USA), European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry (EAPD, Europe), and The Japanese Journal of Pediatric Dentistry (JJPD, Japan) as subjects for this study, as each one is considered the core academic journals of the corresponding region. Data from the four journals were collected by reviewing articles published over 20 years from 2004 to 2023. Sixteen classification criteria were established, and 4,231 papers were assigned a classification number. This study included 1,205 studies from the JKAPD, 1,320 from the PD, 1,070 from the EAPD, and 636 from the JJPD. Publication trends were similar across the pediatric dental journals; however, the JJPD showed no correlation with other journals. Dental caries and prevention of dental caries were the most published topics in all journals (15.4%), followed by systemic diseases or patients with special health care needs (9.9%), conservative treatment and restorative materials (9.2%), and dental growth and developmental disturbances (8.8%). The thematic distribution of articles in the JKAPD observed in this study is consistent with that of previous studies. Although there were regional variations, the distribution of publication trends did not significantly change before or after the 21st century. This study offers valuable insights for comparing and analyzing trends in domestic and international research and providing an opportunity to examine which social and environmental changes have influenced these trends.

Background: The accuracy of Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC) mappings is reportedly low, and the LOINC codes used for research purposes in Korea have not been validated for accuracy or usability. Our study aimed to evaluate the discrepancies and similarities in interoperability using existing LOINC mappings in actual patient care settings. Methods: We collected data on local test codes and their corresponding LOINC mappings from seven university hospitals. Our analysis focused on laboratory tests that are frequently requested, excluding clinical microbiology and molecular tests. Codes from nationwide proficiency tests served as intermediary benchmarks for comparison. A research team, comprising clinical pathologists and terminology experts, utilized the LOINC manual to reach a consensus on determining the most suitable LOINC codes. Results: A total of 235 LOINC codes were designated as optimal codes for 162 frequent tests.Among these, 51 test items, including 34 urine tests, required multiple optimal LOINC codes, primarily due to unnoted properties such as whether the test was quantitative or qualitative, or differences in measurement units. We analyzed 962 LOINC codes linked to 162 tests across seven institutions, discovering that 792 (82.3%) of these codes were consistent. Inconsistencies were most common in the analyte component (38 inconsistencies, 33.3%), followed by the method (33 inconsistencies, 28.9%), and properties (13 inconsistencies, 11.4%). Conclusion This study reveals a significant inconsistency rate of over 15% in LOINC mappings utilized for research purposes in university hospitals, underlining the necessity for expert verification to enhance interoperability in real patient care.

Background: The accuracy of Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC) mappings is reportedly low, and the LOINC codes used for research purposes in Korea have not been validated for accuracy or usability. Our study aimed to evaluate the discrepancies and similarities in interoperability using existing LOINC mappings in actual patient care settings. Methods: We collected data on local test codes and their corresponding LOINC mappings from seven university hospitals. Our analysis focused on laboratory tests that are frequently requested, excluding clinical microbiology and molecular tests. Codes from nationwide proficiency tests served as intermediary benchmarks for comparison. A research team, comprising clinical pathologists and terminology experts, utilized the LOINC manual to reach a consensus on determining the most suitable LOINC codes. Results: A total of 235 LOINC codes were designated as optimal codes for 162 frequent tests.Among these, 51 test items, including 34 urine tests, required multiple optimal LOINC codes, primarily due to unnoted properties such as whether the test was quantitative or qualitative, or differences in measurement units. We analyzed 962 LOINC codes linked to 162 tests across seven institutions, discovering that 792 (82.3%) of these codes were consistent. Inconsistencies were most common in the analyte component (38 inconsistencies, 33.3%), followed by the method (33 inconsistencies, 28.9%), and properties (13 inconsistencies, 11.4%). Conclusion This study reveals a significant inconsistency rate of over 15% in LOINC mappings utilized for research purposes in university hospitals, underlining the necessity for expert verification to enhance interoperability in real patient care.

The common data model (CDM) has found widespread application in healthcare studies, but its utilization in cancer research has been limited. This article describes the development and implementation strategy for Cancer Clinical Library Databases (CCLDs), which are standardized cancer-specific databases established under the Korea-Clinical Data Utilization Network for Research Excellence (K-CURE) project by the Korean Ministry of Health and Welfare. Fifteen leading hospitals and fourteen academic associations in Korea are engaged in constructing CCLDs for 10 primary cancer types. For each cancer type-specific CCLD, cancer data experts determine key clinical data items essential for cancer research, standardize these items across cancer types, and create a standardized schema. Comprehensive clinical records covering diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes, with annual updates, are collected for each cancer patient in the target population, and quality control is based on six-sigma standards. To protect patient privacy, CCLDs follow stringent data security guidelines by pseudonymizing personal identification information and operating within a closed analysis environment. Researchers can apply for access to CCLD data through the K-CURE portal, which is subject to Institutional Review Board and Data Review Board approval. The CCLD is considered a pioneering standardized cancer-specific database, significantly representing Korea’s cancer data. It is expected to overcome limitations of previous CDMs and provide a valuable resource for multicenter cancer research in Korea.

Background: The accuracy of Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC) mappings is reportedly low, and the LOINC codes used for research purposes in Korea have not been validated for accuracy or usability. Our study aimed to evaluate the discrepancies and similarities in interoperability using existing LOINC mappings in actual patient care settings. Methods: We collected data on local test codes and their corresponding LOINC mappings from seven university hospitals. Our analysis focused on laboratory tests that are frequently requested, excluding clinical microbiology and molecular tests. Codes from nationwide proficiency tests served as intermediary benchmarks for comparison. A research team, comprising clinical pathologists and terminology experts, utilized the LOINC manual to reach a consensus on determining the most suitable LOINC codes. Results: A total of 235 LOINC codes were designated as optimal codes for 162 frequent tests.Among these, 51 test items, including 34 urine tests, required multiple optimal LOINC codes, primarily due to unnoted properties such as whether the test was quantitative or qualitative, or differences in measurement units. We analyzed 962 LOINC codes linked to 162 tests across seven institutions, discovering that 792 (82.3%) of these codes were consistent. Inconsistencies were most common in the analyte component (38 inconsistencies, 33.3%), followed by the method (33 inconsistencies, 28.9%), and properties (13 inconsistencies, 11.4%). Conclusion This study reveals a significant inconsistency rate of over 15% in LOINC mappings utilized for research purposes in university hospitals, underlining the necessity for expert verification to enhance interoperability in real patient care.

This study explored the evolving trends in pediatric dentistry research, focusing on the changes in research trends in the Journal of the Korean Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (JKAPD) and comparing them with those in other international journals and previous studies. We selected the JKAPD (Korea), Pediatric Dentistry (PD, USA), European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry (EAPD, Europe), and The Japanese Journal of Pediatric Dentistry (JJPD, Japan) as subjects for this study, as each one is considered the core academic journals of the corresponding region. Data from the four journals were collected by reviewing articles published over 20 years from 2004 to 2023. Sixteen classification criteria were established, and 4,231 papers were assigned a classification number. This study included 1,205 studies from the JKAPD, 1,320 from the PD, 1,070 from the EAPD, and 636 from the JJPD. Publication trends were similar across the pediatric dental journals; however, the JJPD showed no correlation with other journals. Dental caries and prevention of dental caries were the most published topics in all journals (15.4%), followed by systemic diseases or patients with special health care needs (9.9%), conservative treatment and restorative materials (9.2%), and dental growth and developmental disturbances (8.8%). The thematic distribution of articles in the JKAPD observed in this study is consistent with that of previous studies. Although there were regional variations, the distribution of publication trends did not significantly change before or after the 21st century. This study offers valuable insights for comparing and analyzing trends in domestic and international research and providing an opportunity to examine which social and environmental changes have influenced these trends.