An end-to-end implementation pipeline
Conversion, quality assurance, and analysis were implemented within restricted data environments as a complete end-to-end workflow.
Home / Accomplishment / ASCVD
Case 01 · Cardiovascular
Comparable risk stratification across East Asian data environments
IMPRESIVE established a cross-database study-preparedness framework in the ASCVD case. The programme compared very-high-risk and high-risk patients across countries based on common-data-model.
- Population
- Hospitalized ASCVD
- Comparison
- Very-high-risk vs high-risk
- Outcome
- ASCVD recurrence
- Routes tested
- OMOP and Sentinel
Study cohorts
Cohorts in each data environment
Cohort size, study period, and the share of female patients reported by each participating data environment.
Why this question
A clinical question and an implementation test
-
The scientific question
Does the guideline-based risk stratification distinguish recurrent risk across East Asian settings?
The 2018 AHA/ACC/Multi-society Guideline distinguishes patients at very high risk of recurrent atherosclerotic cardiovascular events from those at high risk. The study examined whether the same stratification continued to distinguish recurrent risk across the represented East Asian settings.
-
The implementation question
Do CDM implementations produce interpretable results across data environments?
The programme implemented the same ASCVD study question in common-data-model environments across countries, allowing results to be reviewed across sites and implementation pathways.
-
Why test both
One case, two complementary questions
The case examined both whether the clinical risk stratification remained informative across settings and whether the shared study specification could be implemented consistently within different CDM-based data environments.
What came back
The risk gradient persisted, while treatment intensity remained limited
Reported HR range across CDM-based analyses
1.2 – 1.6Across the represented CDM-based data environments, the very-high-risk group consistently showed higher recurrent ASCVD risk than the high-risk group, indicating that the shared stratification remained informative across settings.
High-intensity statin use during hospitalization
18% – 34%Treatment intensity remained limited despite elevated recurrent risk. Between 18% and 34% of patients were prescribed high-intensity statins during hospitalization.
Subgroup explorer
Index-event patterns differ across strata
Taiwan NHIRD
Index-event profile
View accessible data table
Interactive evidence · Cross-database comparison
Compare the risk across outcomes and data environments
The very-high-risk group had a reported hazard-ratio range of 1.2–1.6 for recurrent ASCVD relative to the high-risk group. Select an outcome below to see each data environment's estimate.
Very-high-risk versus high-risk
Estimated hazard ratios across participating data environments
View accessible data table
Two-CDM comparison
Compare both CDM implementation settings at once
Extended case · interactive visualization
Explore the ASCVD visualization module
Review the current study results for cohort assembly, characteristics, event rates, and comparative estimates through one linked interface.
What it made possible
Where this case leads
A comparison of CDM routes
The same study question was implemented through both OMOP and Sentinel, allowing their practical trade-offs to be examined rather than assumed.
A reusable module library
Reusable modules for eligibility, baseline characteristics, drug utilization, and clinical outcomes were carried forward into the dermatology studies without rebuilding the workflow.
From ASCVD to an additional therapeutic area
See how the same framework was applied to atopic dermatitis and prurigo nodularis.