OBJECTIVES: Patient care using genetics presents complex challenges. Clinical decision support (CDS) tools are a potential solution because they provide patient-specific risk assessments and/or recommendations at the point of care. This systematic review evaluated the literature on CDS systems which have been implemented to support genetically guided precision medicine (GPM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted in MEDLINE and Embase, encompassing January 1, 2011-March 14, 2023. The review included primary English peer-reviewed research articles studying humans, focused on the use of computers to guide clinical decision-making and delivering genetically guided, patient-specific assessments, and/or recommendations to healthcare providers and/or patients. RESULTS: The search yielded 3832 unique articles. After screening, 41 articles were identified that met the inclusion criteria. Alerts and reminders were the most common form of CDS used. About 27 systems were integrated with the electronic health record; 2 of those used standards-based approaches for genomic data transfer. Three studies used a framework to analyze the implementation strategy. DISCUSSION: Findings include limited use of standards-based approaches for genomic data transfer, system evaluations that do not employ formal frameworks, and inconsistencies in the methodologies used to assess genetic CDS systems and their impact on patient outcomes. CONCLUSION: We recommend that future research on CDS system implementation for genetically GPM should focus on implementing more CDS systems, utilization of standards-based approaches, user-centered design, exploration of alternative forms of CDS interventions, and use of formal frameworks to systematically evaluate genetic CDS systems and their effects on patient care.

BACKGROUND: Genomic kidney conditions often have a long lag between onset of symptoms and diagnosis. To design a real time genetic diagnosis process that meets the needs of nephrologists, we need to understand the current state, barriers, and facilitators nephrologists and other clinicians who treat kidney conditions experience, and identify areas of opportunity for improvement and innovation. METHODS: Qualitative in-depth interviews were conducted with nephrologists and internists from 7 health systems. Rapid analysis identified themes in the interviews. These were used to develop service blueprints and process maps depicting the current state of genetic diagnosis of kidney disease. RESULTS: Themes from the interviews included the importance of trustworthy resources, guidance on how to order tests, and clarity on what to do with results. Barriers included lack of knowledge, lack of access, and complexity surrounding the case and disease. Facilitators included good user experience, straightforward diagnoses, and support from colleagues. DISCUSSION: The current state of diagnosis of kidney diseases with genetic etiology is suboptimal, with information gaps, complexity of genetic testing processes, and heterogeneity of disease impeding efficiency and leading to poor outcomes. This study highlights opportunities for improvement and innovation to address these barriers and empower nephrologists and other clinicians who treat kidney conditions to access and use real time genetic information.

OBJECTIVE: Given the importance AI in genomics and its potential impact on human health, the American Medical Informatics Association-Genomics and Translational Biomedical Informatics (GenTBI) Workgroup developed this assessment of factors that can further enable the clinical application of AI in this space. PROCESS: A list of relevant factors was developed through GenTBI workgroup discussions in multiple in-person and online meetings, along with review of pertinent publications. This list was then summarized and reviewed to achieve consensus among the group members. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial informatics research and development are needed to fully realize the clinical potential of such technologies. The development of larger datasets is crucial to emulating the success AI is achieving in other domains. It is important that AI methods do not exacerbate existing socio-economic, racial, and ethnic disparities. Genomic data standards are critical to effectively scale such technologies across institutions. With so much uncertainty, complexity and novelty in genomics and medicine, and with an evolving regulatory environment, the current focus should be on using these technologies in an interface with clinicians that emphasizes the value each brings to clinical decision-making.

OBJECTIVE: The Genomic Medicine Working Group of the National Advisory Council for Human Genome Research virtually hosted its 13th genomic medicine meeting titled "Developing a Clinical Genomic Informatics Research Agenda". The meeting's goal was to articulate a research strategy to develop Genomics-based Clinical Informatics Tools and Resources (GCIT) to improve the detection, treatment, and reporting of genetic disorders in clinical settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Experts from government agencies, the private sector, and academia in genomic medicine and clinical informatics were invited to address the meeting's goals. Invitees were also asked to complete a survey to assess important considerations needed to develop a genomic-based clinical informatics research strategy. RESULTS: Outcomes from the meeting included identifying short-term research needs, such as designing and implementing standards-based interfaces between laboratory information systems and electronic health records, as well as long-term projects, such as identifying and addressing barriers related to the establishment and implementation of genomic data exchange systems that, in turn, the research community could help address. DISCUSSION: Discussions centered on identifying gaps and barriers that impede the use of GCIT in genomic medicine. Emergent themes from the meeting included developing an implementation science framework, defining a value proposition for all stakeholders, fostering engagement with patients and partners to develop applications under patient control, promoting the use of relevant clinical workflows in research, and lowering related barriers to regulatory processes. Another key theme was recognizing pervasive biases in data and information systems, algorithms, access, value, and knowledge repositories and identifying ways to resolve them.

OBJECTIVE: In many cases, genetic testing labs provide their test reports as portable document format files or scanned images, which limits the availability of the contained information to advanced informatics solutions, such as automated clinical decision support systems. One of the promising standards that aims to address this limitation is Health Level Seven International (HL7) Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources Clinical Genomics Implementation Guide-Release 1 (FHIR CG IG STU1). This study aims to identify various data content of some genetic lab test reports and map them to FHIR CG IG specification to assess its coverage and to provide some suggestions for standard development and implementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed sample reports of 4 genetic tests and relevant professional reporting guidelines to identify their key data elements (KDEs) that were then mapped to FHIR CG IG. RESULTS: We identified 36 common KDEs among the analyzed genetic test reports, in addition to other unique KDEs for each genetic test. Relevant suggestions were made to guide the standard implementation and development. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The FHIR CG IG covers the majority of the identified KDEs. However, we suggested some FHIR extensions that might better represent some KDEs. These extensions may be relevant to FHIR implementations or future FHIR updates.The FHIR CG IG is an excellent step toward the interoperability of genetic lab test reports. However, it is a work-in-progress that needs informative and continuous input from the clinical genetics' community, specifically professional organizations, systems implementers, and genetic knowledgebase providers.

Clinicians often attribute much of their burnout experience to use of the electronic health record, the adoption of which was greatly accelerated by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009. That same year, AMIA's Policy Meeting focused on possible unintended consequences associated with rapid implementation of electronic health records, generating 17 potential consequences and 15 recommendations to address them. At the 2020 annual meeting of the American College of Medical Informatics (ACMI), ACMI fellows participated in a modified Delphi process to assess the accuracy of the 2009 predictions and the response to the recommendations. Among the findings, the fellows concluded that the degree of clinician burnout and its contributing factors, such as increased documentation requirements, were significantly underestimated. Conversely, problems related to identify theft and fraud were overestimated. Only 3 of the 15 recommendations were adjudged more than half-addressed.

Burnout is a long-term stress reaction marked by emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and a lack of sense of personal accomplishment. Burnout in clinicians is receiving significant attention. Some have proposed that clinicians are experiencing symptoms of moral injury, defined as "perpetrating, failing to prevent, bearing witness to, or learning about acts that transgress deeply held moral beliefs and expectations." Current efforts to improve the electronic health record (EHR) have focused on improving the user experience to reduce burden that has been identified as a contributing factor to provider burnout. However, if EHRs are contributing to moral injury, improvements to user experience will not eliminate the effects on providers. Current research has not evaluated the risk for moral injury resulting from the use of EHRs. This Perspective reviews the differences between burnout and moral injury, discusses the implications for clinicians using EHRs, and highlights the need for research to better define the problem.

The eMERGE Network is establishing methods for electronic transmittal of patient genetic test results from laboratories to healthcare providers across organizational boundaries. We surveyed the capabilities and needs of different network participants, established a common transfer format, and implemented transfer mechanisms based on this format. The interfaces we created are examples of the connectivity that must be instantiated before electronic genetic and genomic clinical decision support can be effectively built at the point of care. This work serves as a case example for both standards bodies and other organizations working to build the infrastructure required to provide better electronic clinical decision support for clinicians.

To move beyond a select few genes/drugs, the successful adoption of pharmacogenomics into routine clinical care requires a curated and machine-readable database of pharmacogenomic knowledge suitable for use in an electronic health record (EHR) with clinical decision support (CDS). Recognizing that EHR vendors do not yet provide a standard set of CDS functions for pharmacogenetics, the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Informatics Working Group is developing and systematically incorporating a set of EHR-agnostic implementation resources into all CPIC guidelines. These resources illustrate how to integrate pharmacogenomic test results in clinical information systems with CDS to facilitate the use of patient genomic data at the point of care. Based on our collective experience creating existing CPIC resources and implementing pharmacogenomics at our practice sites, we outline principles to define the key features of future knowledge bases and discuss the importance of these knowledge resources for pharmacogenomics and ultimately precision medicine.

BACKGROUND: Electronic health records (EHRs) are increasingly used for clinical and translational research through the creation of phenotype algorithms. Currently, phenotype algorithms are most commonly represented as noncomputable descriptive documents and knowledge artifacts that detail the protocols for querying diagnoses, symptoms, procedures, medications, and/or text-driven medical concepts, and are primarily meant for human comprehension. We present desiderata for developing a computable phenotype representation model (PheRM). METHODS: A team of clinicians and informaticians reviewed common features for multisite phenotype algorithms published in PheKB.org and existing phenotype representation platforms. We also evaluated well-known diagnostic criteria and clinical decision-making guidelines to encompass a broader category of algorithms. RESULTS: We propose 10 desired characteristics for a flexible, computable PheRM: (1) structure clinical data into queryable forms; (2) recommend use of a common data model, but also support customization for the variability and availability of EHR data among sites; (3) support both human-readable and computable representations of phenotype algorithms; (4) implement set operations and relational algebra for modeling phenotype algorithms; (5) represent phenotype criteria with structured rules; (6) support defining temporal relations between events; (7) use standardized terminologies and ontologies, and facilitate reuse of value sets; (8) define representations for text searching and natural language processing; (9) provide interfaces for external software algorithms; and (10) maintain backward compatibility. CONCLUSION: A computable PheRM is needed for true phenotype portability and reliability across different EHR products and healthcare systems. These desiderata are a guide to inform the establishment and evolution of EHR phenotype algorithm authoring platforms and languages.

OBJECTIVE: Clinicians' ability to use and interpret genetic information depends upon how those data are displayed in electronic health records (EHRs). There is a critical need to develop systems to effectively display genetic information in EHRs and augment clinical decision support (CDS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The National Institutes of Health (NIH)-sponsored Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research and Electronic Medical Records & Genomics EHR Working Groups conducted a multiphase, iterative process involving working group discussions and 2 surveys in order to determine how genetic and genomic information are currently displayed in EHRs, envision optimal uses for different types of genetic or genomic information, and prioritize areas for EHR improvement. RESULTS: There is substantial heterogeneity in how genetic information enters and is documented in EHR systems. Most institutions indicated that genetic information was displayed in multiple locations in their EHRs. Among surveyed institutions, genetic information enters the EHR through multiple laboratory sources and through clinician notes. For laboratory-based data, the source laboratory was the main determinant of the location of genetic information in the EHR. The highest priority recommendation was to address the need to implement CDS mechanisms and content for decision support for medically actionable genetic information. CONCLUSION: Heterogeneity of genetic information flow and importance of source laboratory, rather than clinical content, as a determinant of information representation are major barriers to using genetic information optimally in patient care. Greater effort to develop interoperable systems to receive and consistently display genetic and/or genomic information and alert clinicians to genomic-dependent improvements to clinical care is recommended.

The rapid advance of gene sequencing technologies has produced an unprecedented rate of discovery of genome variation in humans. A growing number of authoritative clinical repositories archive gene variants and disease phenotypes, yet there are currently many more gene variants that lack clear annotation or disease association. To date, there has been very limited coverage of gene-specific predictors in the literature. Here the evaluation is presented of "gene-specific" predictor models based on a naïve Bayesian classifier for 20 gene-disease datasets, containing 3986 variants with clinically characterized patient conditions. The utility of gene-specific prediction is then compared with "all-gene" generalized prediction and also with existing popular predictors. Gene-specific computational prediction models derived from clinically curated gene variant disease datasets often outperform established generalized algorithms for novel and uncertain gene variants.