A Framework to Support the Sharing and Reuse of Computable Phenotype Definitions Across Health Care Delivery and Clinical Research Applications.

INTRODUCTION: The ability to reproducibly identify clinically equivalent patient populations is critical to the vision of learning health care systems that implement and evaluate evidence-based treatments. The use of common or semantically equivalent phenotype definitions across research and health care use cases will support this aim. Currently, there is no single consolidated repository for computable phenotype definitions, making it difficult to find all definitions that already exist, and also hindering the sharing of definitions between user groups. METHOD: Drawing from our experience in an academic medical center that supports a number of multisite research projects and quality improvement studies, we articulate a framework that will support the sharing of phenotype definitions across research and health care use cases, and highlight gaps and areas that need attention and collaborative solutions. FRAMEWORK: An infrastructure for re-using computable phenotype definitions and sharing experience across health care delivery and clinical research applications includes: access to a collection of existing phenotype definitions, information to evaluate their appropriateness for particular applications, a knowledge base of implementation guidance, supporting tools that are user-friendly and intuitive, and a willingness to use them. NEXT STEPS: We encourage prospective researchers and health administrators to re-use existing EHR-based condition definitions where appropriate and share their results with others to support a national culture of learning health care. There are a number of federally funded resources to support these activities, and research sponsors should encourage their use.

A Brief Chronicle of CD4 as a Biomarker for HIV/AIDS: A Tribute to the Memory of John L. Fahey.

Foundational cellular immunology research of the 1960s and 1970s, together with the advent of monoclonal antibodies and flow cytometry, provided the knowledge base and the technological capability that enabled the elucidation of the role of CD4 T cells in HIV infection. Research identifying the sources and magnitude of variation in CD4 measurements, standardized reagents and protocols, and the development of clinical flow cytometers all contributed to the feasibility of widespread CD4 testing. Cohort studies and clinical trials provided the context for establishing the utility of CD4 for prognosis in HIV-infected persons, initial assessment of in vivo antiretroviral drug activity, and as a surrogate marker for clinical outcome in antiretroviral therapeutic trials. Even with sensitive HIV viral load measurement, CD4 cell counting is still utilized in determining antiretroviral therapy eligibility and time to initiate therapy. New point of care technologies are helping both to lower the cost of CD4 testing and enable its use in HIV test and treat programs around the world.

The Life Cycle of Corporate Venture Capital

This paper establishes the life-cycle dynamics of Corporate Venture Capital (CVC) to explore the information acquisition role of CVC investment in the process of corporate innovation. I exploit an identification strategy that allows me to isolate exogenous shocks to a firm's ability to innovate. Using this strategy, I first find that the CVC life cycle typically begins following a period of deteriorated corporate innovation and increasingly valuable external information, lending support to the hypothesis that firms conduct CVC investment to acquire information and innovation knowledge from startups. Building on this analysis, I show that CVCs acquire information by investing in companies with similar technological focus but have a different knowledge base. Following CVC investment, parent firms internalize the newly acquired knowledge into internal R&D and external acquisition decisions. Human capital renewal, such as hiring inventors who can integrate new innovation knowledge, is integral in this step. The CVC life cycle lasts about four years, terminating as innovation in the parent firm rebounds. These findings shed new light on discussions about firm boundaries, managing innovation, and corporate information choices.