14313 results for ""Pennsylvania+German"+ACS+study+'Socius'+open+access"

in 18.15 milliseconds.

• Heart Failure Network - Imaging from Nitrate's Effect on Activity Tolerance in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFN NEAT-Imaging)

  Data Access NOTE: Please refer to the “Authorized Access” section below for information about how access to the data from this accession differs from many other dbGaP accessions.Objectives: To determine the effect of isosorbide mononitrate on daily activity in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction.Background: Nitrates are commonly prescribed for symptom relief in patients with heart failure. Early studies in patients with heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction concluded that long-acting nitrates improves activity tolerance; however, approximately half of heart failure patients have preserved ejection fraction. The effects of nitrates in patients with heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction have not been extensively studied and the overall effect of nitrates on activity tolerance in such patients is uncertain.Subjects: There were a total of 110 patients enrolled with 51 patients assigned to receive isosorbide mono-nitrate first and placebo second, and 59 patients assigned to receive placebo first and isosorbide mononitrate second.Design: Enrolled subjects underwent baseline assessments, including echocardiography, quality-of-life scores, 6-minute walk test distance, and NT-proBNP levels. Subjects were also supplied with two kinetic activity monitors containing high-sensitivity triaxis accelerometers, to be worn 24 hours per day. The accelerometer measurements were expressed as arbitrary accelerometer units and stored every 15 minutes equaling 96 data points per day. The 15-minute cumulative accelerometer units were totaled over a 24-hour period to provide daily accelerometer units.Subjects were assigned to one of two treatment groups: 6 weeks of placebo first with crossover to 6 weeks of isosorbide mononitrate, or 6 weeks of isosorbide mononitrate first with crossover to 6 weeks of placebo. The study drugs were prepared as 30-mg tablets of isosorbide mononitrate and matching placebo. During each 6-week period, patients were instructed to take no study drug for the first 2 weeks followed by one tablet (30 mg daily) for 1 week, two tablets (60 mg once daily) for 1 week, and four tablets (120 mg once daily) until the next study visit, for a treatment duration of at least 2 weeks and up to 4 weeks. After each 6-week period, patients returned to the study center to repeat end-point assessments. The primary outcome for the study was the comparison of average daily accelerometer units during the period in which patients were receiving the 120-mg dose of isosorbide mononitrate compared to the period in which patients received the placebo. Other secondary end points included the 6-minute walk distance and the post-walk Borg dyspnea score, scores on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire and the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire, and NT-proBNP levels. In addition, subjects completed a questionnaire indicating in which period (first, second, no preference) they felt better. Conclusions: Patients were active for fewer hours of the day during the 120-mg phase of receipt of isosorbide mononitrate as compared with placebo. Furthermore, during all study-drug regimens combined (30 mg to 120 mg), patients were less active during receipt of isosorbide mononitrate as compared with placebo. There was no significant effect of isosorbide mononitrate on secondary outcomes.

  Study phs004254

• The study provides comprehensive access to the set of EGA studies which may be useful as controls.

  The subjects studies in these datasets were selected due to being healthy control individuals or otherwise provide well characterised phenotype or exclude certain disease phenotype categories such that they may be useful as control population, such as to derive allele frequencies from a known reference population.

  Study EGAS00001000646

• Genentech Data Access Committee

  Dac EGAC00001000055

• Center for Technology Licensing at Cornell University for data associated with Nature Medicine 2024 paper

  For data access to plasma/tumor/normal samples from the manuscript "Ultrasensitive plasma-based monitoring of tumor burden using machine learning-guided signal enrichment" from Widman et al. Nature Medicine 2024

  Dac EGAC50000000207

• Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist (TOPCAT-BioLINCC)

  Data Access NOTEPlease refer to the "Authorized Access" section below for information about how access to the data from this accession. Access differs from many other dbGaP accessions. BiospecimensAccess to Biospecimens is through the NHLBI Biologic Specimen and Data Repository Information Coordinating Center (BioLINCC). Biospecimens from TOPCAT include Buffy Coat, DNA, Plasma, Serum, Urine, and Whole Blood. Please note that use of biospecimens in genetic research is subject to a tiered consent. Objectives The TOPCAT trial evaluated the effectiveness of aldosterone antagonist therapy in reducing cardiovascular mortality, aborted cardiac arrest, and heart failure hospitalization in patients who have heart failure with preserved systolic function. Background Many patients with heart failure have a normal, or near-normal, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Such patients share similar signs and symptoms as patients who have heart failure and a reduced LVEF, as well as an impaired quality of life and a poor prognosis. However, at the time of TOPCAT, the benefit of medical therapies for heart failure were limited to those with a reduced LVEF. Due to a lack of favorable evidence from clinical trials, clinical guidelines offered no specific recommendations for the management of heart failure in patients with preserved LVEF, except for attention to coexisting conditions. Among patients with heart failure and a reduced LVEF and those with myocardial infarction complicated by heart failure and left ventricular dysfunction, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists have been shown to be effective in reducing overall mortality and hospitalizations for heart failure. In small mechanistic studies involving patients with heart failure and preserved left ventricular function, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists improved measures of diastolic function. However, rigorous testing was needed regarding their effect on clinical outcomes in patients with preserved LVEF. Therefore, the TOPCAT trial was initiated to determine whether treatment with spironolactone, an aldosterone antagonist, would improve clinical outcomes in patients with symptomatic heart failure and a relatively preserved LVEF. Participants A total of 3445 participants were enrolled, with 1722 assigned to the spironolactone group and 1723 assigned to the placebo group. Among these, 2464 participants were enrolled via the hospitalization stratum and 981 were enrolled via the BNP stratum. Design TOPCAT was a phase 3, multicenter, international, randomized, double-blind, and placebo controlled trial. Eligible participants were randomly assigned to receive either spironolactone or placebo in a 1:1 ratio. Randomization was stratified according to whether the patient met the criterion for previous hospitalization or BNP elevation. The baseline visit included assessment of socio-demographics, physical characteristics, medical history, lifestyle factors, laboratory measures, electrocardiography variables and health-related quality of life and functional status. Study drugs were initially administered at a dose of 15 mg once daily, which was increased as tolerated to a maximum of 45 mg daily during the first four months after randomization. Subsequent dose adjustments were made as required and subjects continued to receive other treatments for heart failure and co-existing illnesses. Measurement of potassium and creatinine levels was required within 1 week after a change in the study-drug dose and at each scheduled study visit. Follow-up visits to monitor symptoms, medications, and events and to dispense study drug were scheduled every four months during the subject's first year on the study, and every six months thereafter. The mean follow-up interval was 3.3 years in each study group. Repository blood and urine samples were collected at the baseline and 1 year visits from consenting subjects. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular mortality, aborted cardiac arrest or hospitalization for the management of heart failure. Secondary endpoints included all-cause mortality, hospitalization for heart failure management, new onset of diabetes mellitus or atrial fibrillation, and quality of life. A subset of subjects also participated in the Echocardiography or Echocardiography and Vascular Stiffness ancillary studies. Echocardiography, and additionally tonometry in the Echocardiography and Vascular Stiffness study, were performed at baseline and at either 12 or 18 months following randomization. If the subject was already enrolled in the TOPCAT trial at the time the ancillary study was initiated, but had not yet reached the 18 month visit, baseline was determined via a retrospective analysis performed on any echocardiographic images completed within 60 days prior to TOPCAT enrollment and no tonometry was performed if applicable. Conclusions In patients with heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction, treatment with spironolactone did not significantly reduce the incidence of the primary composite outcome of death from cardiovascular causes, aborted cardiac arrest, or hospitalization for the management of heart failure. However, the drug reduced the secondary endpoint of heart failure hospitalization incidence.

  Study phs003665

• Heart Failure Network - Phosphodiesterase-5 Inhibition to Improve Clinical Status and Exercise Capacity in Diastolic Heart Failure (HFN RELAX-BioLINCC)

  Data Access NOTE: Please refer to the “Authorized Access” section below for information about how access to the data from this accession differs from many other dbGaP accessions. Related StudyEcho images are available through HFN RELAX-ImagingObjectivesThe RELAX trial tested the hypothesis that chronic phosphodiesterase type-5 inhibitor therapy with sildenafil would improve exercise capacity and clinical status in heart failure patients with normal ejection fraction, as compared to placebo. Background Heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a common and highly morbid condition that is characterized by chronic exercise intolerance, progressive functional decline and a high rate of readmission. At the time of the RELAX trial, clinical trials of renin-angiotensin system antagonists had not demonstrated improvement in outcomes or clinical status in HFpEF, and effective therapies were needed. Phosphodiesterase type-5 (PDE-5) metabolizes the nitric oxide (NO) and natriuretic peptide (NP) systems' second messenger cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP), and thus may limit beneficial NO and NP actions in the heart, vasculature and kidney. Pre-clinical studies suggest that inhibition of PDE-5 reverses adverse cardiac structural and functional remodeling and enhances vascular, neuroendocrine and renal function. In clinical studies, PDE-5 inhibitor therapy improved exercise tolerance and clinical status in patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension and in patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). A small, single-center study in HFpEF observed improved hemodynamics, left ventricular (LV) diastolic function, right ventricular (RV) systolic function, LV hypertrophy and lung function with chronic PDE-5 inhibition as compared to placebo. In aggregate, these studies suggested the potential for PDE-5 inhibition to ameliorate several key pathophysiological perturbations in HFpEF, and thus improve exercise capacity and clinical status. ParticipantsA total of 216 participants were enrolled in the trial with 113 in the Sildenafil group and 103 in the placebo group. Design Participants who met screening criteria underwent baseline studies including a history and physical examination, cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPXT), six-minute walk distance, Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLWHFQ), echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, and phlebotomy for biomarkers. Subjects were then randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to either the sildenafil or placebo intervention group. The study drug was administered orally at 20 mg three times daily (TID) for 12 weeks. If the dose was well tolerated at 12 weeks, it was increased to 60 mg TID for another 12 weeks. If side effects developed, study staff could recommend discontinuation or return to a lower or previously tolerated dose of study drug. Sildenafil levels 2 hours after a scheduled dose of study drug were obtained at 12 and 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was exercise capacity determined by change in peak oxygen consumption during the CPXT after 24 weeks of therapy. Secondary endpoints included change in six-minute walk distance at 12 and 24 weeks, change in peak oxygen consumption at 12 weeks, and a three tier score reflective of clinical status where patients were ranked based on time to death (lowest tier), time to cardiovascular or cardiorenal hospitalization (middle tier), and change in the MLWHFQ for patients alive without cardiovascular or cardiorenal hospitalization after 24 weeks (highest tier). Conclusions Chronic phosphodiesterase type-5 inhibitor therapy with sildenafil for 24 weeks did not alter exercise capacity or clinical status compared to placebo in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction.

  Study phs003565

• Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA-BioLINCC)

  Data Access NOTE: Please refer to the “Authorized Access” section below for information about how access to the data from this accession differs from many other dbGaP accessions.Related Studies: Other CARDIA data available include:phs000236.v2.p2 PAGE: CALiCo: Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults(CARDIA) phs000309.v3.p2 The CARDIA-GENEVA Study phs000399.v1.p2 NHLBI GO-ESP: Heart Cohorts Exome Sequencing Project (CARDIA) phs000613.v1.p2 NHLBI CARDIA Candidate Gene Association Resource (CARe) phs003675.v1.p1 CARDIA Multi-omics Obesity & CVD Substudy – Year 20 Untargeted Metabolomics Data phs001612.v3.p2 NHLBI TOPMed: CARDIA (Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults) phs003045.v1.p1 Collaborative Cohort of Cohorts for COVID-19 Research (C4R): Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults Study (CARDIA) phs000285.v4.p3 CARDIA_Cohort Available Data: Available data for request include exam data through Year 30 and outcomes and death data through 2022. Additionally, data from 28 ancillary studies are available for request.Objectives: The original objectives of CARDIA were to document levels of risk factors for coronary artery disease and potential determinants of these risk factors in young adults; to study the interrelationships of risk factors and lifestyles and to document behavioral and environmental changes during the transition from young adulthood to middle age; to compare cross-sectional and longitudinal data on age-related trends in cardiovascular disease risk factors; and to compare levels and evolution of risk factors between men and women, blacks and whites, and in groups of differing socioeconomic status. Goals of the study have evolved to emphasize understanding determinants of left ventricular mass, emerging obesity and hypertension, and sequelae of hypertension in pregnancy.Background: CARDIA is designed to increase understanding of contributors to changes in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors during the critical years of transition from young adulthood to middle age. CARDIA was funded initially in 1983 for a five-year cycle that included two rounds of examinations. Contract renewals have allowed for subsequent re-examinations.Participants: Black and white men and women; ages 18-30 years at entry with a range of attained education; original sample size: 5,115.Design: CARDIA is a population-based observational study of 5,115 participants aged 18-30 years recruited in 1985-1986. The sample was designed to achieve approximately balanced subgroups of race, gender, education (high school or less and more than high school) and age (18-24 and 25-30). Forty percent of the cohort had no more than a high school education. A total of nine examinations have been completed in the cohort with examination cycles at year 2 of the project and years 5, 7, 10 , 15, 20, 25, and 30.In addition to standard measurements of blood pressure, anthropometry, blood lipids, smoking behavior, physical activity, diet, pulmonary function, and many psychological factors, CARDIA has other included measurements (in subsets or in the full cohort) to obtain unique information on other aspects of risk factor development and early morbidity. These have included: graded exercise treadmill testing; echocardiography, particularly for measurement of left ventricular mass; cardiovascular reactivity; serum cotinine; Lp(a), apoE phenotype, apolipoprotein A1 and B; homocysteine; skin reflectance; body composition by dual X-ray absorptiometry; glucose tolerance testing; vascular resistance and compliance; and plasma renin activity and sympathetic nervous system activity.

  Study phs003739

• Blueprint Data Access Committee.

  Access to the sequence and alignment and genotype level data produced by the Blueprint Consortium is controlled by the Blueprint Data Access Committee (DAC). Access to data will be granted to qualified investigators for appropriate use. Please email blueprint-dac@ebi.ac.uk to request the Data Access Application and Data Access Agreement.

  Dac EGAC00001000135

• DAC Portal documentation

  DAC Portal Welcome to the DAC Portal documentation! If you are involved in governance or legal aspects, technical or operational aspects, or serving as a data steward, this page will be helpful for you. By exploring these materials, you can define your own Data Access Committee (DAC) and policies, understand the minimal requirements for a DAC and a policy object, and comprehend how the EGA data access requests are managed. DAC Portal Index Setting up your account DACs and Policies Pending Request table Manage Data Requests History page Audit your DACs, policies, and datasets Deprecation User Preferences DAC API - A programmatic approach Setting up your account Register yourself as an EGA user. The Helpdesk team will validate your account (this could take up to 48 hours). After validation, you will receive an email with a link to verify your email - Make sure you click on the link to verify your account! If you don’t receive the email, please check your spam folder. Once your account is active you can login to the DAC Portal. We recommend you to check out the Take The Tour! DACs and Policies Create a DAC Click on Create a DAC Add the title and description to your DAC. Once ready, click on the ‘Create’ button. You will have to wait until the Helpdesk Team validates the creation of your DAC. Once approved by Helpdesk, your DAC will be assigned with a persistent identifier (EGAC). Edit a DAC Once your DAC is registered and approved, you can edit it and add contacts. Remember, you can add as many contacts as needed. And, you can also remove/add contacts anytime. To add a contact, you must write the username or email of a registered EGA user in the Members field. Once you have typed the whole username or email, a drop-down menu will appear where you can select the contact. Select a contact from the drop-down menu. Make sure you write the full username or email of the contact so it appears as an option. Make sure that you select one main contact. Set up the role you want to grant to the new contact of the DAC. We recommend you to check out the FAQ to learn more about the different roles! After adding all the necessary contacts and assigning roles, click on Update. This will send an email notification to the new DAC member, letting them know about the invitation to managing the DAC. Once they log into the DAC Portal, they will be able to either accept or turn down the invitation. Create a policy First, please note that all information registered in a policy metadata object will be publicly available on the EGA website. For each released dataset, all users will be able to read the policy under the “Data Access” tab. Select Create a Policy from the Policies tab. Select the DAC that you want your policy to depend on. Add the title and terms and conditions for accessing and using your data. If you already have an external website for data access requests, you can add the URL directly here (see example here). You can find a template of a Data Access Agreement (DAA) document in our Policy documentation page. The DAA template is provided for guidance only and should be adapted to suit your own purpose depending on the security policies, terms for publication or embargoes, and restrictions on data use or sharing. You can also add Data Use Ontologies (DUO) to your policy. These DUO codes are used to semantically tag the terms and conditions of using the data linked to the policy (example). For more information, you can refer to the Data Uso Ontology documentation. Once completed, make sure to click the Create button in order to register your policy. A persistent identifier (EGAP) will be assigned automatically. Edit a policy Please, note that you will not be able to edit the policy if it shows in orange. Meaning that you are a member of the DAC linked to that policy. Members don’t have edit rights. Only admins can edit objects. You can check your registered policies on My policies, available at the menu in the top-right corner. Select your policy. It will then display the information of that policy, allowing you to edit the information. Once you are done with the modifications, click Update. Pending Requests Table Table Settings Upon selecting a specific DAC, you will be presented with a customisable table showcasing all pending data access requests. This table allows you to tailor the displayed information according to your preferences by selecting desired columns. Available Columns (Displayed with the Eye Icon): Date: The date when the data access request was submitted. Full Name: Name and surname of the user submitting the request. Email: Email address associated with the user's request. Username: The username linked to the EGA account of the user submitting the request. Organisation: Affiliated organisation of the user submitting the request. Dataset: EGA accession ID for the requested EGA dataset. Dataset Title: Title of the requested dataset. DAC Comment: Space provided for internal comments related to the request. Expiration: Option to specify an expiration date for granted permissions. Check more information on the pending request table here! Table Filters By default, all data access requests are displayed. However, you have the option to apply filters to refine your view. Follow these steps to apply filters: Click on the More button. This action will reveal the different columns available for applying filters. As you select columns, the checked fields will be displayed at the top of the request table. Choose the specific values within the selected columns that you want to filter for. Click the Search button to apply the selected filters. Do you find yourself frequently applying the same filters? You can save multiple combinations of filters for easy access at any time! Here's how: Click the Save button. Provide a descriptive name for the filter combination. Click Save to confirm. To load saved filters, simply select the saved filter from the dropdown menu to apply it automatically. Check more information on filters here! Advanced Search For users requiring more granular control over their data access requests, the DAC Portal offers an Advanced Search feature using JIRA Query Language (JQL). With JQL, you can craft precise and complex queries to filter and retrieve specific data access requests based on various criteria such as date, user details, dataset attributes, and more. Using JQL's flexibility, you can create custom queries to meet your specific needs, allowing for advanced filtering options beyond the standard filters provided. You can find the Advanced Search feature following these steps: Click the … button Select Advanced To view the allowed fields for filtering and explore all available options, simply click on the info icon. Once you have written the filtering values, click the Search button to apply. Check more information on filters here! Manage Data Requests Upon logging into the DAC Portal, you'll notice a sand clock icon next to the DAC ID, indicating the number of pending requests. Click on the DAC to review these requests. Accept requests Click on the right side of the toggle button to grant access to the user. You can manage other requests before proceeding to the next step. After managing the requests, click on the Apply button. A confirmation box will appear summarising the options to be applied. Click on Yes, Confirm to proceed with granting permissions. Deny requests Click on the left side of the toggle button to deny access to the user. Provide a reason for the denial. Note that the user will receive an email with this reason. Click on the Done button. You can manage other requests before proceeding to the next step. After managing the requests, click on the Apply button. A confirmation box will appear summarising the options to be applied. Click on Yes, Confirm to proceed with denying permissions. Tips! Apply a filter to view all requests to be managed at once. Use the toggle in the row with column names to grant or deny permissions for multiple requests simultaneously. You can grant and deny permissions in the same action, simplifying the process. The confirmation box will provide a summary of all actions, including grants, denials, DAC comments, and expiration dates. History Page The History page serves as a dedicated space to view information regarding all requests managed by all DAC members. Here, you can review active permissions and revoke them as needed. Go to the History page by clicking on the "HISTORY" button from a DAC page in the DAC Portal. Here are the different row types you may find: Current permissions: row in green with a toggle button to revoke permissions on the right. Approved requests: row in green, with no toggle button. Request denied: row in red with “request denied” on the right. Permission revoked: row in red with “permission revoked” on the right. Distinctions to Note! Between Request Denied and Permission Revoked: Request Denied: Refers to requests that were rejected from the outset, indicating that access to the dataset was never granted. Permission Revoked: Indicates that permissions were previously granted but have since been revoked. Users with permissions revoked have previously accessed the dataset. Between Approved Request and Current Permissions: Approved Request: Represents an entry when a data access request has been approved in the past. Current Permissions: Denotes ongoing permissions where a user has present access to the dataset. An approved request may now appear as Permission Revoked in the present. By observing these different rows, users can gain insight into the complete history of a user's interactions and permissions regarding a dataset over time. To revoke access to a specific user for a dataset, follow these steps: Go to History page Look for the row with the specific permissions. You can use the filters! Click on the toggle button to revoke access. Add a denial reason. Bear in mind that the requester will receive the denial reason! Click on the Apply button. Check more information on the Hisotry page here! Audit your metadata objects In the DAC Portal, you can efficiently manage and audit various metadata objects pertinent to your role as a Data Controller. Upon accessing the DAC Portal, you will encounter three primary tabs on the homepage: DAC: Contains information about Data Access Committees (DACs). Policies: Provides insights into linked policies. Datasets: Displays datasets and relevant details. Within each tab, you'll find a comprehensive list of the objects you manage, these being grouped by type (DAC, Policies, Datasets), as well as by your role (member/admin). Whilst the lists give you a quick look, to check how things are connected, we've added a table at the bottom DACs and policies. DACs Let’s check which policies are linked to a specific DAC: Go to "My DACs." Select a DAC. Click on "EDIT" to see more details. You are now on this page: Scroll down to see the linked policies. Click on “List of linked policies of this DAC” and you will see a list of all policies linked to your selected DAC. Policies Do you want to view a list of datasets connected to a particular policy? Follow the same steps mentioned earlier, but head to the policy tab this time. In the policy tab, you'll find a list of all your policies. Here, you may notice two different icons next to the policy ID (EGAP): DAC Icon (): This represents the DAC. Hover your mouse over the icon to see the DAC ID. Dataset icon (): This indicates datasets falling under that policy. The number next to the icon tells you how many datasets are linked to the policy. For example, if you see "2" next to the icon, it means there are two datasets linked to that policy. If you want to check the linked datasets and their relevant information, simply click on a specific policy. You'll then find the "List of linked datasets of this policy" at the bottom of the page. Datasets Finally, in the dataset tab, by default you will see a list of all the datasets you can manage with all your DACs and policies. Yet, we've included two handy ways to organise them: DAC vs. policy: You can group by datasets, either by DAC or policy. Released vs. unreleased: You can sort out datasets based on their release status. Feel free to experiment with both options! For instance, if you want to see which DACs have unreleased datasets, simply select DAC and unreleased, and you'll get the details you need! Deprecation Do you have a bunch of metadata objects like DACs and policies that you don’t need anymore? This section shows you how to get rid of them! But what does "deprecation" mean for EGA? It's basically changing the status of a metadata object to "deprecated," which means we won't be using it in the future. In simple terms, it's like saying these objects are no longer useful. However, because we believe in making metadata FAIR, once an object has a persistent identifier, we can't just delete it. So, instead of deleting, we deprecate it. Here's a helpful tip! If you want to make a metadata object disappear from the DAC Portal, deprecate it. You won’t see it in the portal anymore! Let’s say you want to deprecate a DAC. Let’s do it! Go to "My DACs." Select a DAC. Click "EDIT" to see more details. You are now in this page: Click on the Deprecate button It will then appear a message. There are two options here: Your DAC is not linked to any policy, hence it’s ready to be deprecated. Click on “Yes. Confirm” to deprecate your DAC object! Your DAC is linked to at least one policy, and you need to either: Deprecate the linked policy first, or Link the policy to a different DAC Now, let’s say you don’t want to get rid of the policy altogether, but you want to change the DAC it’s linked to. Here's how: Go to the policy tab. Find the policy you want to change (for example, EGAP50000000019). Choose a new DAC to link it to. Click on Update. See the Edit Policy section for more details. After ensuring that the DAC we want to deprecate isn’t linked to any policy, return to the "My DACs" section and follow the steps outlined previously. This will lead you to a confirmation message. You can only deprecate DACs and Policies. To deprecate a dataset, please contact our Helpdesk team. Check more information on how deprecation works here! User Preferences We have implemented email notifications in the DAC Portal. Here’s the complete list: DACs: Pending requests Approved by Helpdesk Rejected by Helpdesk DAC Invitation Requesters: Data access request approved Data access request denied Permissions revoked Upcoming expiration date As a DAC member, you will be able to decide whether you want to receive the DAC notifications or not. For that, go to the top-right corner menu, select User Preference. You will be able to decide whether you want to receive notifications for: Approved by Helpdesk Rejected by Helpdesk DAC Invitation For pending requests, you will be able to select how often do you want to receive the notification: Daily Weekly Fortnightly As a DAC member, you are responsible for managing data access requests. Consequently, you will receive notifications for pending requests. If you prefer not to manage these requests, please arrange to be removed as a contact for your DAC. Here's a tip! Do you have a pending request that you don’t want to receive a notification? Add a DAC comment! The EGA understands that a request resolution can take some time, for this reason, if you add a comment (make sure you save it by clicking the APPLY button!) we will filter those requests at the time of sending the notification! DAC API - A programmatic approach In addition to the new DAC Portal, we are excited to announce the release of the DAC API. This enables users to programmatically manage permissions. If you are interested in learning more about the technical specifications, you can click the button below. Check out the DAC API specification!

  Documentation access/data-access-committee/dac-portal

• Implementation, Adoption, and Utility of Family History in Diverse Care Settings

  The purpose of this study is to address the key question of whether and how family health history (FHH) is adopted as a tool to more efficiently manage patients at risk for breast, colon, ovarian, and hereditary cancer syndromes as well as thrombophilia and coronary heart disease (CHD) and to provide evidence supporting clinical utility -- improved health behaviors in patients and physician screening recommendations. Five health care delivery organizations will participate in this demonstration project: Duke University, the Medical College of Wisconsin, the Air Force, Essentia Health, University of North Texas. Duke will serve as a coordinating center for this project (Pro00043372) as well as a site. Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) measures as intermediate clinical effectiveness measures for Coronary Heart Disease (CHD) and selected cancers as well as survey/formative data and electronic medical record (EMR) data will be used as outcomes measures. The research model is purposely designed to mimic clinical delivery as an important step toward widespread implementation and sustainability. In addition, a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing usual care to the FHH guided preventive health model will be used. The completion of this project will result in an optimal strategy for integration of FHH data collection and clinical decision support (CDS) tools into an EMR and demonstrate the utility of the FHH intervention among diverse primary care patients, their settings, their providers, and the health systems that deliver their care. Specific Aim 1: To optimize the collection of patient entered FHH in diverse clinical environments for coronary heart disease, thrombosis, and selected cancers Specific Aim 2: To export FHH data to an open clinical decision support (open CDS) platform and return CDS results to providers and patients (and to EMRs where relevant). To explore the integration of genetic risk and FHH data at selected sites. Specific Aim 3: To assess the clinical and personal utility of FHH using a pragmatic observational study design to assess reach, adoption, integrity, exposure, and sustainability, and to capture, analyze, and report effectiveness outcomes at each stakeholder level: patient, provider, and clinic/system. Specific Aim 4: To take a leadership role in the dissemination of guidelines for a FHH intervention across in diverse practice settings. AAA Hypertension Lupus Multiple sclerosis Obesity Osteoporosis Thyroid disease Rheumatoid arthritis Blood clotting (6): Blood Clot (high risk features) Factor V PT mutation AT III deficiency Protein S deficiency Protein C deficiency Brain Disorders (5): Dementia Hemorrhagic stroke Ischemic stroke Macrocephaly Seizure Cancer/Adenomas (32): Bone cancer Brain cancer Breast cancer Colon cancer Adrenal cortex tumor Neuroendocrine tumor Paraganglioma Pheochromoctyoma Pituitary adenoma Medullary thyroid cancer Non-medullary (follicular or papillary) thyroid cancer Don't know type of thyroid cancer Thyroid nodule Other type of endocrine cancer Esophageal cancer Kidney cancer Leukemia Lipoma Liver cancer Muscle cancer Ovarian cancer Pancreatic cancer Prostate cancer Rectal cancer Retinoblastoma Melanoma Non-melanoma skin cancer Do not know type of skin cancer Small bowel cancer Stomach cancer Uterine cancer Other type of cancer Cardiovascular/heart/artery disease (5): Atrial fibrillation Carotid stenosis Heart attack/coronary artery disease Peripheral arterial disease Other heart disease Diabetes (3): Gestational diabetes Diabetes type I Diabetes type 2 Digestive Disorders (5): Colon polyp Crohn's disease Irritable bowel syndrome Ulcerative colitis Other digestive disorder Eye Disorder (3): Blindness Glaucoma Macular degeneration Hereditary Cancer Syndromes (22): Birt-Hogg-Dube syndrome Cowden syndrome Familial adenomatous polyposis Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome Hereditary diffuse gastric cancer Hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell carcinoma syndrome Hereditary melenoma Hereditary papillary renal cancer syndrome Hereditary paraganglioma-pheochromocytoma syndrome Hereditary retinoblastoma Juvenile polyposis Li-Fraumeni syndrome Lynch syndrome Mutyh-associated polyposis Malignant hyperthermia susceptibility Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2 Nevoid basal cell carcinoma syndrome Peutz-Jeghers syndrome Tuberous Sclerosis complex Von-Hippel Lindau syndrome Other hereditary cancer Hereditary Cardiovascular syndromes (10): Long qt Brugada Catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy Dilated cardiomyopathy Left ventricular non-compaction syndrome Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia Ehlers-Danlos syndrome Marfan syndrome Other hereditary cardiovascular syndrome High cholesterol (2): Hyperlipidemia Familial hypercholesterolemia Kidney Disease (6): Cystic kidney disease Diabetic kidney disease Kidney nephrosis Nephritis Nephrotic syndrome Other kidney disease Liver Disease (6): Alpha 1 antitrypsinase deficiency Auto-immune hepatitis Hereditary hemochromatosis Primary biliary cirrhosis Sclerosing cholangitis Wilson's disease Lung Disease (3): Asthma COPD/chronic bronchitis/emphysema Other lung disease Psychological disorder (14): Addiction ADHD Autism Bipolar Depression Eating disorder Intellectual disability Obsessive compulsive disorder Panic disorder Personality disorder PTSD Schizophrenia Social phobia Sickle cell/thalassemia (3): Sickle cell disease Sickle cell trait Thalassemia

  Study phs001641