Your Go/No-Go Feasibility Decision
Segment 6 · 29–30 minutes
This is the page learners keep. Fill it in for your own question. If any row in the first table is a hard no, you have your answer before you write a protocol, and that is a win, not a failure.
The checks
| # | Check | What proves it |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Concepts exist | Standard concepts found in ATLAS Search for each element (condition, drug, outcome), in the right domain |
| 2 | Concepts are present in the data | Nonzero record and person counts in your target source, not just in the vocabulary |
| 3 | Population fits | The source contains the right people (here: people with motor neuron disease, seen in a setting that records what you need) |
| 4 | Time can be anchored | A datable index event exists (first riluzole exposure), with enough observation period around it |
| 5 | Outcome is capturable | The outcome is the kind of event this data type actually records (claims vs EHR differ) |
| 6 | Sample size is sufficient | The count meeting all criteria at once is large enough for the comparison you want |
| 7 | Governance clears | You know whether feasibility counts and the full study need IRB, DUA, or training |
For which OHDSI tool answers each check, see the checks-to-tools appendix.
Reading your result
- All yes: feasible at your site. Move to a formal cohort definition and pilot it locally.
- 1–5 yes but 6 no: feasible only across the network. The question is sound; scope it as a network study and engage the community early.
- 5 no (outcome not recorded as structured data): find out where the information is kept. If it is in notes, the question needs text extraction or chart abstraction; if it is not collected at all, take the question to a source that records it.
- 3 no (population absent): not feasible in this source. Do not try to fix it with mapping; take the question to a database that has the population.
- 1 or 2 no (concepts absent or unmapped): possibly a mapping or ETL issue. Ask your steward before concluding the question is dead.
- 7 no or unknown: stop and resolve governance before generating anything, even counts.
One-page worksheet
Copy this into your notes and complete it for your question.
RESEARCH QUESTION (one sentence):
_______________________________________________________________
SPECIFICATION
Target population: ______________________________________
Prior condition: ______________________________________
Exposure(s): ______________________________________
Outcome: ______________________________________
Index / time anchor: ______________________________________
Observation window: ______________________________________
CONCEPTS (from ATLAS Search)
Element Standard concept? Present in my source? Count
________________ _______________ ___________________ _____
________________ _______________ ___________________ _____
________________ _______________ ___________________ _____
INSTANCE FACTS (from your data steward)
Steward name / contact: ______________________________________
Source (EHR / claims): ______________________________________
CDM + vocab version: ______________________________________
ALS clinic in source?: ______________________________________
ALSFRS-R structured?: ______________________________________
Notes in the CDM?: ______________________________________
Access path: ______________________________________
Counts allowed pre-IRB?: ______________________________________
DECISION
[ ] Feasible here
[ ] Feasible via network only
[ ] Not feasible as posed -> reframe: __________________________
Next action: ______________________________________
The habit to leave with
Every real study starts with a version of this page. The researchers who finish with a running network study are not the ones with the cleverest questions. They are the ones who checked feasibility first, found the dead ends in minutes, and spent their real time on the question that survived. Make this worksheet the first thing you do, every time.