The DARTNet Institute: Seeking a Sustainable Support Mechanism for Electronic Data Enabled Research Networks

Context: Clinical data research networks require large investments in infrastructure support to maintain their abilities to extract, transform, and load data from varied data sources, expand electronic data sources and develop learning communities. Case Description: This paper outlines a sustainable business model of ongoing infrastructure support for clinical data research activities. The DARTNet Institute is a not-for-profit 501(c)(3) organization that serves as a support entity for multiple practice-based research networks. Several clinical data research networks working closely with a professional society began collaborating to support shared goals in 2008. This loose affiliation called itself the “DARTNet Collaborative.” In 2011, the DARTNet Institute incorporated as an independent, not-for-profit entity. The business structure allows DARTNet to advocate for all partners without operating its own practice-based research network, serve as a legal voice for activities that overlap multiple partners, share personnel resources through service contracts between partners, and purchase low-cost (nonprofit rate) software. Major Themes: DARTNet’s business model relies upon four diverse sources of revenue: (1) DARTNet licenses and provides access to a propriety software system that extracts, transforms, and loads data from all major electronic health records (EHRs) utilized in the United States, and which also provides clinical decision support for research studies; (2) DARTNet operates a recognized, national professional-society-quality improvement registry that enables organizations to fulfill Meaningful Use 2 criteria; (3) DARTNet provides access to data for research activities that are funded by direct research dollars, provided at prices that generate excess revenue; and (4) DARTNet provides access to large primary care datasets for observational studies and pregrant analyses such as for sample size development. The ability of the system to support pragmatic trials will be described. Conclusion: The DARTNet model facilitates the use of direct grant dollars to generate revenue to support the overall enterprise through a purchased services arrangement. Other services provided through subcontracting provide facilities and administration fees as well as direct dollars to support the system. The flexibility of the business model overcomes the complicated financial arrangements and governance requirements of many professional associations and academic medical centers.

[1]  D. Ettinger,et al.  Phase II study of high-dose methotrexate in the treatment of patients with non-small cell carcinoma of the lung: an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study. , 1980, Cancer treatment reports.

[2]  Jill J. Francis,et al.  Designing theoretically-informed implementation interventions , 2006, Implementation science : IS.

[3]  Douglas H. Fernald,et al.  Card Studies for Observational Research in Practice , 2011, The Annals of Family Medicine.

[4]  Griffin M. Weber,et al.  Serving the enterprise and beyond with informatics for integrating biology and the bedside (i2b2) , 2010, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[5]  D. Nease,et al.  Infrastructure Requirements for Practice-Based Research Networks , 2005, The Annals of Family Medicine.

[6]  Timothy C Jenkins,et al.  Effects of clinical pathways for common outpatient infections on antibiotic prescribing. , 2013, The American journal of medicine.

[7]  J. Lellouch,et al.  Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. , 1967, Journal of chronic diseases.

[8]  Stuart Speedie,et al.  The Electronic Primary Care Research Network (ePCRN): a new era in practice-based research. , 2006, Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM.

[9]  David A. Chambers,et al.  National Institutes of Health approaches to dissemination and implementation science: current and future directions. , 2012, American journal of public health.

[10]  Lisa M. Schilling,et al.  Scalable Architecture for Federated Translational Inquiries Network (SAFTINet) Technology Infrastructure for a Distributed Data Network , 2013, EGEMS.

[11]  Wilson D. Pace,et al.  Do Professional Development Programs for Maintenance of Certification (MOC) Affect Quality of Patient Care? , 2014, The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine.

[12]  Wilson D. Pace,et al.  Enhancing Electronic Health Record Measurement of Depression Severity and Suicide Ideation: A Distributed Ambulatory Research in Therapeutics Network (DARTNet) Study , 2012, The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine.

[13]  A Report From Aspn,et al.  Spontaneous Abortion In Primary Care , 1988, The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine.

[14]  Shaun Treweek,et al.  What kind of randomized trials do we need? , 2009, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[15]  L. Green,et al.  Prescription for Health: Round 1 Initial Results , 2005, The Annals of Family Medicine.

[16]  Graham A Colditz,et al.  Implementation science and its application to population health. , 2013, Annual review of public health.

[17]  Deborah S. Main,et al.  The practice-based research network as a model for end-of-life care research: challenges and opportunities. , 2005, Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center.

[18]  L. Green,et al.  Spontaneous abortion in primary care. A report from ASPN. , 1988, The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice.

[19]  Wilson D. Pace,et al.  Effects of Changing Guidelines on Prescribing Aspirin for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events , 2014, The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine.

[20]  Elias Brandt,et al.  Comparative Effectiveness Research in DARTNet Primary Care Practices: Point of Care Data Collection on Hypoglycemia and Over-the-Counter and Herbal Use Among Patients Diagnosed With Diabetes , 2010, Medical care.

[21]  Douglas H. Fernald,et al.  Improving the Management of Skin and Soft Tissue Infections in Primary Care: A Report From State Networks of Colorado Ambulatory Practices and Partners (SNOCAP-USA) and the Distributed Ambulatory Research in Therapeutics Network (DARTNet) , 2011, The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine.

[22]  Sarah M. Greene,et al.  The role of research in integrated healthcare systems: the HMO Research Network. , 2004, The American journal of managed care.

[23]  C. Fox,et al.  Improving evidence-based primary care for chronic kidney disease: study protocol for a cluster randomized control trial for translating evidence into practice (TRANSLATE CKD) , 2013, Implementation Science.

[24]  Lucila Ohno-Machado Scalable National Network for Effectiveness Research (SCANNER) , 2013 .

[25]  Designing theoretically-informed implementation interventions The Improved Clinical Effectiveness through Behavioural Research Group ( ICEBeRG ) * , 2022 .

[26]  Margaret Grey,et al.  Describing Primary Care Encounters: The Primary Care Network Survey and the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey , 2007, The Annals of Family Medicine.

[27]  E. Wright,et al.  The Effect of Cesarean Delivery on Birth Outcome in Very Low Birth Weight Infants , 1991, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[28]  Ross C Brownson,et al.  A glossary for dissemination and implementation research in health. , 2008, Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMP.

[29]  S. Woolf The meaning of translational research and why it matters. , 2008, JAMA.

[30]  Bryan J Weiner,et al.  The U.S. training institute for dissemination and implementation research in health , 2013, Implementation Science.

[31]  M. Cabana,et al.  Researching asthma across the ages: insights from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's Asthma Network. , 2014, The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology.