GA4GH: International policies and standards for data sharing across genomic research and healthcare

The Global Alliance for Genomics and Health (GA4GH) aims to accelerate biomedical advances by enabling the responsible sharing of clinical and genomic data through both harmonized data aggregation and federated approaches. The decreasing cost of genomic sequencing (along with other genome-wide molecular assays) and increasing evidence of its clinical utility will soon drive the generation of sequence data from tens of millions of humans, with increasing levels of diversity. In this perspective, we present the GA4GH strategies for addressing the major challenges of this data revolution. We describe the GA4GH organization, which is fueled by the development efforts of eight Work Streams and informed by the needs of 24 Driver Projects and other key stakeholders. We present the GA4GH suite of secure, interoperable technical standards and policy frameworks and review the current status of standards, their relevance to key domains of research and clinical care, and future plans of GA4GH. Broad international participation in building, adopting, and deploying GA4GH standards and frameworks will catalyze an unprecedented effort in data sharing that will be critical to advancing genomic medicine and ensuring that all populations can access its benefits

GA4GH: International policies and standards for data sharing across genomic research and healthcare.

The Global Alliance for Genomics and Health (GA4GH) aims to accelerate biomedical advances by enabling the responsible sharing of clinical and genomic data through both harmonized data aggregation and federated approaches. The decreasing cost of genomic sequencing (along with other genome-wide molecular assays) and increasing evidence of its clinical utility will soon drive the generation of sequence data from tens of millions of humans, with increasing levels of diversity. In this perspective, we present the GA4GH strategies for addressing the major challenges of this data revolution. We describe the GA4GH organization, which is fueled by the development efforts of eight Work Streams and informed by the needs of 24 Driver Projects and other key stakeholders. We present the GA4GH suite of secure, interoperable technical standards and policy frameworks and review the current status of standards, their relevance to key domains of research and clinical care, and future plans of GA4GH. Broad international participation in building, adopting, and deploying GA4GH standards and frameworks will catalyze an unprecedented effort in data sharing that will be critical to advancing genomic medicine and ensuring that all populations can access its benefits

International Survey: Factors Associated With Operative Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures and Implications for the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons' Appropriate Use Criteria

Objectives: Through an international survey, we assessed whether deciding to operatively treat an intra-articular distal radius fracture (DRF) is guided by identifiable patient and surgeon factors. In addition, we compared surgeons' treatment decisions with the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons' Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) treatment recommendations. Methods: This cross-sectional survey asked 224 surgeons to operatively or nonoperatively treat 28 hypothetical patients with radiographs of an intra-articular DRF. We randomized patient age (50/70 years), gender, mechanism of injury, activity level, and OTA/AO fracture type. We classified 6 fractures as “nonclinically significant displacement” and 22 as “potentially clinically significant displacement.” Multilevel logistic regression analysis was performed. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported. Statistical significance was P < 0.05. Results: Patient factors independently associated with surgery included younger age (OR 6.7, P = 0.003), clinically significant fracture displacement (type B: OR 122, CI, 20–739, P < 0.001; type C: OR 59, CI, 12–300, P < 0.001), normal activity level (OR 5.0, P < 0.001), and high-energy mechanisms (OR 1.3, P = 0.002). Surgeon factors associated with recommending surgery included practicing outside the United States (Europe: OR 2.6, P < 0.001; “other”: OR 4.8, P < 0.001). Hand surgeons most often selected surgery, as compared to orthopaedic trauma surgeons (OR 2.3, P = 0.001) and “other orthopaedists” (OR 2.2, P = 0.022). Thirty-seven percent of treatment decisions for patients with normal activity levels were rated by AUC recommendations as “rarely appropriate,” which included 91% disagreement for 70-year-olds with nonclinically significant displacement. Conclusions: Surgeons use patient age and fracture displacement to make treatment recommendations for intra-articular DRF. We recommend that the AUC be updated to include these clinical factors as essential components in its algorithm. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level V. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence