The global healthcare data collection and labeling market is experiencing robust growth, driven by the increasing adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) in healthcare. The rising volume of patient data generated through electronic health records (EHRs), wearable devices, and medical imaging necessitates efficient and accurate data labeling for training sophisticated AI algorithms. This demand fuels the market's expansion. While precise market sizing figures require further details, a reasonable estimate, considering the current growth trajectory of related AI and healthcare sectors, would place the 2025 market value at approximately $2 billion, with a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 15-20% projected through 2033. Key drivers include the need for improved diagnostic accuracy, personalized medicine, and drug discovery, all heavily reliant on high-quality labeled datasets. Furthermore, regulatory compliance mandates around data privacy and security are indirectly driving the adoption of specialized data collection and labeling services, ensuring data integrity and patient confidentiality. The market is segmented based on data type (imaging, text, sensor data), labeling method (supervised, unsupervised, semi-supervised), service type (data annotation, data augmentation, model training), and end-user (hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, research institutions). Companies like Alegion, Appen, and iMerit are key players, offering a range of services to meet diverse healthcare data needs. However, challenges remain, including data heterogeneity, scalability concerns related to large datasets, and the potential for bias in labeled data. Addressing these challenges requires continuous innovation in data collection methodologies, advanced labeling techniques, and the development of robust quality control measures. Future market growth will hinge on the successful integration of advanced technologies like synthetic data generation and automated labeling tools, aiming to reduce costs and accelerate the development of AI-powered healthcare solutions.

The global medical equipment data collector market is experiencing robust growth, driven by the increasing adoption of electronic health records (EHRs), the rising prevalence of chronic diseases necessitating enhanced patient monitoring, and the expanding demand for real-time data analysis in healthcare settings. The market is segmented by application (hospitals and clinics) and type (handheld and fixed), with handheld devices gaining traction due to their portability and ease of use in various medical environments. Hospitals currently dominate the application segment, owing to their higher data collection needs and sophisticated infrastructure. However, the clinic segment is expected to witness significant growth due to increasing adoption of data-driven approaches in outpatient care. Technological advancements, such as the integration of advanced sensors and improved data security features, are further fueling market expansion. Competition is intense, with established players like Zebra Technologies and CipherLab alongside emerging companies like Ciontek and Supoin vying for market share through product innovation and strategic partnerships. The market’s geographical distribution shows a concentration in North America and Europe, primarily due to advanced healthcare infrastructure and high adoption rates. However, Asia-Pacific is projected to exhibit the fastest growth, fueled by rising healthcare expenditure and increasing digitalization efforts in developing economies. Regulatory changes related to data privacy and interoperability are likely to influence market dynamics in the coming years. The market is anticipated to maintain a steady CAGR, resulting in significant market expansion throughout the forecast period (2025-2033). The restraints to market growth primarily involve the high initial investment costs associated with implementing data collection systems, concerns regarding data security and patient privacy, and the need for substantial training and support for healthcare professionals in utilizing the technology effectively. However, these challenges are being progressively addressed through the development of cost-effective solutions, robust security protocols, and comprehensive training programs. Furthermore, the increasing availability of cloud-based solutions and data analytics platforms is simplifying data management and accessibility, driving wider adoption. The overall market outlook is positive, with continued growth driven by factors like increasing government initiatives promoting digital healthcare, advancements in wireless technologies, and the burgeoning need for improved operational efficiency in healthcare facilities.

The Research and Development Survey (RANDS) is a platform designed for conducting survey question evaluation and statistical research. RANDS is an ongoing series of surveys from probability-sampled commercial survey panels used for methodological research at the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). RANDS estimates are generated using an experimental approach that differs from the survey design approaches generally used by NCHS, including possible biases from different response patterns and sampling frames as well as increased variability from lower sample sizes. Use of the RANDS platform allows NCHS to produce more timely data than would be possible using traditional data collection methods. RANDS is not designed to replace NCHS’ higher quality, core data collections. Below are experimental estimates of reduced access to healthcare for three rounds of RANDS during COVID-19. Data collection for the three rounds of RANDS during COVID-19 occurred between June 9, 2020 and July 6, 2020, August 3, 2020 and August 20, 2020, and May 17, 2021 and June 30, 2021. Information needed to interpret these estimates can be found in the Technical Notes. RANDS during COVID-19 included questions about unmet care in the last 2 months during the coronavirus pandemic. Unmet needs for health care are often the result of cost-related barriers. The National Health Interview Survey, conducted by NCHS, is the source for high-quality data to monitor cost-related health care access problems in the United States. For example, in 2018, 7.3% of persons of all ages reported delaying medical care due to cost and 4.8% reported needing medical care but not getting it due to cost in the past year. However, cost is not the only reason someone might delay or not receive needed medical care. As a result of the coronavirus pandemic, people also may not get needed medical care due to cancelled appointments, cutbacks in transportation options, fear of going to the emergency room, or an altruistic desire to not be a burden on the health care system, among other reasons. The Household Pulse Survey (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/pulse/reduced-access-to-care.htm), an online survey conducted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic by the Census Bureau in partnership with other federal agencies including NCHS, also reports estimates of reduced access to care during the pandemic (beginning in Phase 1, which started on April 23, 2020). The Household Pulse Survey reports the percentage of adults who delayed medical care in the last 4 weeks or who needed medical care at any time in the last 4 weeks for something other than coronavirus but did not get it because of the pandemic. The experimental estimates on this page are derived from RANDS during COVID-19 and show the percentage of U.S. adults who were unable to receive medical care (including urgent care, surgery, screening tests, ongoing treatment, regular checkups, prescriptions, dental care, vision care, and hearing care) in the last 2 months. Technical Notes: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/rands/reduced-access-to-care.htm#limitations

This data collection contains de-identified clinical health service utilisation data from Bendigo Health and the General Practitioners Practices associated with the Loddon Mallee Murray Medicare Local. The collection also includes associated population health data from the ABS, AIHW and the Municipal Health Plans. Health researchers have a major interest in how clinical data can be used to monitor population health and health care in rural and regional Australia through analysing a broad range of factors shown to impact the health of different populations. The Population Health data collection provides students, managers, clinicians and researchers the opportunity to use clinical data in the study of population health, including the analysis of health risk factors, disease trends and health care utilisation and outcomes.Temporal range (data time period):2004 to 2014Spatial coverage:Bendigo Latitude -36.758711200000010000, Bendigo Longitude 144.283745899999990000

This study was undertaken for the purpose of providing baseline national indicators of access to health care for an evaluation of a program of hospital-based primary care group practices funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The main objective of that large-scale social experiment was to improve access to medical care for the population in areas served by the groups. The access framework and questionnaires designed for the study were developed to provide empirical indicators of the concept that could be used to monitor progress toward this objective. Five data collection instruments were used by the study: the Household Enumeration Folder, the Main Questionnaire, the Health Opinions Questionnaire, the Physician Supplement, and the Hospital/Extended Care Supplement. The Household Enumeration Folder collected basic demographic information on all household members and served as a screener for the episode of illness and minority oversamples. The Main Questionnaire collected information on disability, symptoms of illness, episodes of illness, socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, and access to health care: sources of medical care utilized, problems associated with access to sources of care (e.g., transportation, parking, waiting time for an appointment), satisfaction with medical services received, utilization of medical diagnostic procedures, dental care, and eye care, and insurance coverage and out-of-pocket expenditures for health care. Respondents' opinions concerning the medical care that they received were gauged by the Health Opinions Questionnaire. The Physician Supplement and the Hospital/Extended Care Supplement collected information on physicians contacted and facilities utilized in connection with reported episodes of illness. File 1, File 2, and File 3 constitute the data files for this collection. File 1 comprises data from the Household Enumeration Folder, the Main Questionnaire, and the Health Opinions Questionnaire, plus variables from secondary sources, such as characteristics, derived from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile, of physicians named as caregivers by respondents, and medical shortage data, from various sources, for the respondent's county of residence. File 2 contains the data from the Physician Supplement, while File 3 provides the data collected by the Hospital/Extended Care Supplement.

Patients often provide untruthful information about their health to avoid embarrassment, evade treatment, or prevent financial loss. Privacy disclosures (e.g. HIPAA) intended to dissuade privacy concerns may actually increase patient lying. We used new mouse tracking-based technology to detect lies through mouse movement (distance and time to response) and patient answer adjustment in an online controlled study of 611 potential patients, randomly assigned to one of six treatments. Treatments differed in the notices patients received before health information was requested, including notices about privacy, benefits of truthful disclosure, and risks of inaccurate disclosure. Increased time or distance of device mouse movement and greater adjustment of answers indicate less truthfulness. Mouse tracking revealed a significant overall effect (p < 0.001) by treatment on the time to reach their final choice. The control took the least time indicating greater truthfulness and the privacy + risk group took the longest indicating the least truthfulness. Privacy, risk, and benefit disclosure statements led to greater lying. These differences were moderated by gender. Mouse tracking results largely confirmed the answer adjustment lie detection method with an overall treatment effect (p < .0001) and gender differences (p < .0001) on truthfulness. Privacy notices led to decreased patient honesty. Privacy notices should perhaps be administered well before personal health disclosure is requested to minimize patient untruthfulness. Mouse tracking and answer adjustment appear to be healthcare lie-detection methods to enhance optimal diagnosis and treatment. Methods The data were collected as part of a controlled experiment using Amazon Mechanical Turk, Qualtrics, and JavaScript-based mouse tracking technology.

The Clinical Questions Collection is a repository of questions that have been collected between 1991 – 2003 from healthcare providers in clinical settings across the country. The questions have been submitted by investigators who wish to share their data with other researchers. This dataset is no-longer updated with new content. The collection is used in developing approaches to clinical and consumer-health question answering, as well as researching information needs of clinicians and the language they use to express their information needs. All files are formatted in XML.

The Healthcare Data Collection And Labeling Market size was valued at USD 665.3 million in 2023 and is projected to reach USD 3525.73 million by 2032, exhibiting a CAGR of 26.9 % during the forecasts period. Health care data acquisition and annotation market entails the process of acquiring, sorting and tagging, health care data for different uses including, studies, diagnosis, and enhancing patient care. This data is very helpful for training up machine learning algorithms in the field of health care services including diagnosis of diseases, treatment, drug prescription and in research on the spread of diseases. Current trends depict a rising need for superior quality labeled dataset to enhance the performance of the health-care AI systems. Some of the key uses of this imaging technique are; diagnosis, electronic personal health record, and molecular biology for drug development. Growing adoption of healthcare data across medical fields and the usage of AI and digital records open a pathway in the market for better-annotated datasets.

To effectively utilise hospital beds, operating rooms (OR) and other treatment spaces, it is necessary to precisely plan patient admissions and treatments in advance. As patient treatment and recovery times are unequal and uncertain, this is not easy. In response a sophisticated flexible job-shop scheduling (FJSS) model is introduced, whereby patients, beds, hospital wards and health care activities are respectively treated as jobs, single machines, parallel machines and operations. Our approach is novel because an entire hospital is describable and schedulable in one integrated approach. The scheduling model can be used to recompute timings after deviations, delays, postponements and cancellations. It also includes advanced conditions such as activity and machine setup times, transfer times between activities, blocking limitations and no wait conditions, timing and occupancy restrictions, buffering for robustness, fixed activities and sequences, release times and strict deadlines. To solve the FJSS problem, constructive algorithms and hybrid meta-heuristics have been developed. Our numerical testing shows that the proposed solution techniques are capable of solving problems of real world size. This outcome further highlights the value of the scheduling model and its potential for integration into actual hospital information systems.

As of 2023, ** percent of respondents in Denmark said they collected health data via mobile apps, while around a quarter in the country also collected health data with a wearable device. Across all the Nordic countries, with the exception of Iceland, mobile apps were the most common way to collect health data.

The global healthcare data collection and labeling market size was valued at USD 1.11 billion in 2024 and is likely to cross USD 21.94 billion by 2037, expanding at more than 25.8% CAGR during the forecast period i.e., between 2025-2037. North America industry is estimated to account for largest revenue share of 37.8% by 2037, owing to utilizing state-of-the-art tools such as artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning to improve efficiency and accuracy in data labeling and annotation.

This data collection constitutes a portion of the historical data collected by the project "Early Indicators of Later Work Levels, Disease, and Death." With the goal of constructing datasets suitable for longitudinal analyses of factors affecting the aging process, the project is collecting military, medical, and socioeconomical data on a sample of white males mustered into the Union Army during the Civil War. The project seeks to examine the influence of environmental and host factors prior to recruitment on the health performance and survival of recruits during military service, to identify and show relationships between socioeconomic and biomedical conditions (including nutritional status) of veterans at early ages and mortality rates from diseases at middle and late ages, and to study the effects of health and pensions on labor force participation rates of veterans at ages 65 and over. This installment of the collection, Version M-5, supersedes any previous version of these data. Collected in this version are data from military service, pension, and medical records of veterans who were originally mustered into the Union Army in California, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin regiments. Also included are data from a 20-company pilot sample and information on recruits whose pension records were stored at the Veterans Administration (VA) Archives in Washington, DC, but had not been collected previously. Data include date and place of birth, place of residence, marital status, number of children, occupation, wealth and income, muster place and date, length of service, battles fought, medical experiences (e.g., illness, wounds, and hospital stays), health status, pension information, and date, place, and cause of death. Additional variables provide the place and date of birth of the recruits' wives, children, and parents. The data are organized into three sections according to state of enlistment. Section 1 (Parts 1, 2, 3, and 4) contains data from New England, Kansas, Missouri, Minnesota, Iowa, New Jersey, Indiana, Wisconsin, California, New Mexico, and the 20-company pilot sample. Section 2 (Parts 5, 6, 7, and 8) contains data from New York, Michigan, Washington, DC, Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, and West Virginia, along with pensions data from the VA Archives. Section 3 (Parts 9, 10, 11, and 12) contains data from Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois. The variables in Part 13, Linkage Data, indicate which major document sources were located for each recruit. Also, provided is information regarding death dates (Part 14) for individuals whose death records came from the pension payout cards. Approximate date of death was determined by examining the last record of payment to the pensioner.

This survey charted Finnish citizens' as well as social and healthcare service professionals' attitudes and views concerning secondary use of health and social care data in research and development of services. The study contained two target groups: (1) persons who suffered or had a close relative or acquaintance who suffered from one or more chronic conditions, diseases or disorders, and (2) social and healthcare service professionals. First, the respondents' opinions on the reliability of a variety of authorities and organisations were examined (e.g. the police, Kela, register and statistics authorities, universities) as well as trust in appropriate handling of personal data. They were also asked which type of information they deemed personal or not (e.g. bank account number and balance, purchase history at a grocery store, web browsing history, patient records, genetic information, social security number, phone number). They were asked to evaluate which principles they considered important in handling personal health data (e.g. being able to access one's personal data and to have inaccurate data rectified, and being able to restrict data processing), and the study also surveyed how interested the respondents were in keeping track of the use of their health data, and how willing they would be to permit the use of anonymous health data and genetic information for a variety of purposes (e.g. medicine and treatment development, development of equipment and services, and operations of insurance companies). Next, it was examined whether the respondents kept track of their physical activity with a smartphone or a fitness tracker, for instance, and if they would be willing to permit the use of anonymous data concerning physical activity for a variety of purposes. In addition, the respondents' attitudes were charted with regard to developing medicine research by combining anonymous health data and patient records with other data on, for instance, physical activity, alcohol use, grocery store purchase history, web browsing history, and social media use. The study also examined the willingness to permit access to personal health data for social and healthcare service professionals in a service situation, as well as for social and healthcare authorities and other authorities outside of a service situation. Finally, it was charted how important the respondents deemed different factors relating to data collection (e.g. being able to decide for which purposes personal data, or even anonymous data, can be used, and increasing awareness on how health data can be utilised in scientific research). The reliability of a variety of authorities and organisations, such as social welfare/healthcare organisations, academic researchers and pharmaceutical companies, was also examined in terms of data security and purposes for using data. Background variables included, among others, mother tongue, marital status, household composition, housing tenure, socioeconomic class, political party preference, left-right political self-placement, gross income, economic activity and occupational status, and respondent group (citizen/healthcare service professional/social service professional).

Electronic health records (EHRs) are a rich source of information for medical research and public health monitoring. Information systems based on EHR data could also assist in patient care and hospital management. However, much of the data in EHRs is in the form of unstructured text, which is difficult to process for analysis. Natural language processing (NLP), a form of artificial intelligence, has the potential to enable automatic extraction of information from EHRs and several NLP tools adapted to the style of clinical writing have been developed for English and other major languages. In contrast, the development of NLP tools for less widely spoken languages such as Swedish has lagged behind. A major bottleneck in the development of NLP tools is the restricted access to EHRs due to legitimate patient privacy concerns. To overcome this issue we have generated a citizen science platform for collecting artificial Swedish EHRs with the help of Swedish physicians and medical students. These artificial EHRs describe imagined but plausible emergency care patients in a style that closely resembles EHRs used in emergency departments in Sweden. In the pilot phase, we collected a first batch of 50 artificial EHRs, which has passed review by an experienced Swedish emergency care physician. We make this dataset publicly available as OpenChart-SE corpus (version 1) under an open-source license for the NLP research community. The project is now open for general participation and Swedish physicians and medical students are invited to submit EHRs on the project website (https://github.com/Aitslab/openchart-se), where additional batches of quality-controlled EHRs will be released periodically.

Dataset content

OpenChart-SE, version 1 corpus (txt files and and dataset.csv)

The OpenChart-SE corpus, version 1, contains 50 artificial EHRs (note that the numbering starts with 5 as 1-4 were test cases that were not suitable for publication). The EHRs are available in two formats, structured as a .csv file and as separate textfiles for annotation. Note that flaws in the data were not cleaned up so that it simulates what could be encountered when working with data from different EHR systems. All charts have been checked for medical validity by a resident in Emergency Medicine at a Swedish hospital before publication.

Codebook.xlsx

The codebook contain information about each variable used. It is in XLSForm-format, which can be re-used in several different applications for data collection.

suppl_data_1_openchart-se_form.pdf

OpenChart-SE mock emergency care EHR form.

suppl_data_3_openchart-se_dataexploration.ipynb

This jupyter notebook contains the code and results from the analysis of the OpenChart-SE corpus.

More details about the project and information on the upcoming preprint accompanying the dataset can be found on the project website (https://github.com/Aitslab/openchart-se).

Clinical Data Management System Market Outlook

The global clinical data management system market size is projected to reach approximately USD 2.8 billion by 2032, up from USD 1.1 billion in 2023, reflecting a robust compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of around 11%. This significant growth is primarily driven by the increasing complexity of clinical trials and the need for efficient data management solutions across various sectors.

One of the primary growth factors for the clinical data management system market is the exponential increase in the volume and complexity of clinical trial data, necessitating advanced data management systems. The proliferation of personalized medicine and precision healthcare has led to an increase in the data points collected during clinical trials, making traditional methods of data management obsolete. Advanced clinical data management systems facilitate the efficient handling, storage, and analysis of this data, ensuring compliance with regulatory standards and enhancing the overall efficiency of clinical trials.

Another pivotal growth driver is the substantial increase in research and development (R&D) activities within the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors. Companies are heavily investing in R&D to develop new drugs and therapies, leading to a surge in the number of clinical trials conducted globally. This surge has created a burgeoning demand for innovative and robust clinical data management solutions that can streamline trial processes and ensure data integrity. Furthermore, the growing trend of outsourcing clinical trials to contract research organizations (CROs) has amplified the need for standardized data management processes.

The adoption of cloud-based solutions is also significantly contributing to market growth. Cloud-based clinical data management systems offer numerous advantages over traditional on-premises solutions, including scalability, cost-efficiency, and real-time data access. These benefits are particularly appealing to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and academic research institutes, which often operate with limited budgets. The increased reliance on remote monitoring and decentralized trials, accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, is further propelling the adoption of cloud-based solutions in the clinical data management system market.

The increasing complexity of clinical trials and the need for efficient data management have led to the growing adoption of Clinical Trial Management Software. This software plays a pivotal role in streamlining the management of clinical trials by providing tools for planning, tracking, and managing clinical trial data. With features such as study planning, budget management, and regulatory compliance tracking, Clinical Trial Management Software enhances the efficiency of clinical trials and ensures the integrity of data. As the demand for more sophisticated data management solutions rises, the integration of such software becomes crucial for organizations aiming to optimize their clinical trial processes and outcomes.

Regionally, North America dominates the clinical data management system market, driven by a well-established healthcare infrastructure, significant R&D investments, and the presence of major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. However, the Asia Pacific region is expected to witness the highest growth rate during the forecast period. The rising prevalence of chronic diseases, increasing clinical trial activities, and favorable government initiatives are fostering market growth in this region. The growing outsourcing of clinical trials to countries like India and China, due to cost advantages and a skilled workforce, is also a critical regional growth driver.

Component Analysis

The clinical data management system market is segmented into software and services, each playing a crucial role in the overall ecosystem. Software solutions dominate the market due to their ability to streamline data collection, processing, and analysis. These solutions offer various functionalities, including electronic data capture (EDC), clinical trial management systems (CTMS), and clinical data repositories. The increasing adoption of advanced analytics and artificial intelligence (AI) within these software solutions is further enhancing their capability to manage and interpret complex data sets, driving their demand.

Services, on the other hand, encompass a wide range of offer

Type of medical domain attacked (n = 200).

After May 3, 2024, this dataset and webpage will no longer be updated because hospitals are no longer required to report data on COVID-19 hospital admissions, and hospital capacity and occupancy data, to HHS through CDC’s National Healthcare Safety Network. Data voluntarily reported to NHSN after May 1, 2024, will be available starting May 10, 2024, at COVID Data Tracker Hospitalizations.

The following dataset provides facility-level data for hospital utilization aggregated on a weekly basis (Sunday to Saturday). These are derived from reports with facility-level granularity across two main sources: (1) HHS TeleTracking, and (2) reporting provided directly to HHS Protect by state/territorial health departments on behalf of their healthcare facilities.

The hospital population includes all hospitals registered with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) as of June 1, 2020. It includes non-CMS hospitals that have reported since July 15, 2020. It does not include psychiatric, rehabilitation, Indian Health Service (IHS) facilities, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities, Defense Health Agency (DHA) facilities, and religious non-medical facilities.

For a given entry, the term “collection_week” signifies the start of the period that is aggregated. For example, a “collection_week” of 2020-11-15 means the average/sum/coverage of the elements captured from that given facility starting and including Sunday, November 15, 2020, and ending and including reports for Saturday, November 21, 2020.

Reported elements include an append of either “_coverage”, “_sum”, or “_avg”.

• A “_coverage” append denotes how many times the facility reported that element during that collection week.
• A “_sum” append denotes the sum of the reports provided for that facility for that element during that collection week.
• A “_avg” append is the average of the reports provided for that facility for that element during that collection week.

The file will be updated weekly. No statistical analysis is applied to impute non-response. For averages, calculations are based on the number of values collected for a given hospital in that collection week. Suppression is applied to the file for sums and averages less than four (4). In these cases, the field will be replaced with “-999,999”.

A story page was created to display both corrected and raw datasets and can be accessed at this link: https://healthdata.gov/stories/s/nhgk-5gpv

This data is preliminary and subject to change as more data become available. Data is available starting on July 31, 2020.

Sometimes, reports for a given facility will be provided to both HHS TeleTracking and HHS Protect. When this occurs, to ensure that there are not duplicate reports, deduplication is applied according to prioritization rules within HHS Protect.

For influenza fields listed in the file, the current HHS guidance marks these fields as optional. As a result, coverage of these elements are varied.

For recent updates to the dataset, scroll to the bottom of the dataset description.

On May 3, 2021, the following fields have been added to this data set.

• hhs_ids
• previous_day_admission_adult_covid_confirmed_7_day_coverage
• previous_day_admission_pediatric_covid_confirmed_7_day_coverage
• previous_day_admission_adult_covid_suspected_7_day_coverage
• previous_day_admission_pediatric_covid_suspected_7_day_coverage
• previous_week_personnel_covid_vaccinated_doses_administered_7_day_sum
• total_personnel_covid_vaccinated_doses_none_7_day_sum
• total_personnel_covid_vaccinated_doses_one_7_day_sum
• total_personnel_covid_vaccinated_doses_all_7_day_sum
• previous_week_patients_covid_vaccinated_doses_one_7_day_sum
• previous_week_patients_covid_vaccinated_doses_all_7_day_sum

On May 8, 2021, this data set has been converted to a corrected data set. The corrections applied to this data set are to smooth out data anomalies caused by keyed in data errors. To help determine which records have had corrections made to it. An additional Boolean field called is_corrected has been added.

On May 13, 2021 Changed vaccination fields from sum to max or min fields. This reflects the maximum or minimum number reported for that metric in a given week.

On June 7, 2021 Changed vaccination fields from max or min fields to Wednesday reported only. This reflects that the number reported for that metric is only reported on Wednesdays in a given week.

On September 20, 2021, the following has been updated: The use of analytic dataset as a source.

On January 19, 2022, the following fields have been added to this dataset:

• inpatient_beds_used_covid_7_day_avg
• inpatient_beds_used_covid_7_day_sum
• inpatient_beds_used_covid_7_day_coverage

On April 28, 2022, the following pediatric fields have been added to this dataset:

• all_pediatric_inpatient_bed_occupied_7_day_avg
• all_pediatric_inpatient_bed_occupied_7_day_coverage
• all_pediatric_inpatient_bed_occupied_7_day_sum
• all_pediatric_inpatient_beds_7_day_avg
• all_pediatric_inpatient_beds_7_day_coverage
• all_pediatric_inpatient_beds_7_day_sum
• previous_day_admission_pediatric_covid_confirmed_0_4_7_day_sum
• previous_day_admission_pediatric_covid_confirmed_12_17_7_day_sum
• previous_day_admission_pediatric_covid_confirmed_5_11_7_day_sum
• previous_day_admission_pediatric_covid_confirmed_unknown_7_day_sum
• staffed_icu_pediatric_patients_confirmed_covid_7_day_avg
• staffed_icu_pediatric_patients_confirmed_covid_7_day_coverage
• staffed_icu_pediatric_patients_confirmed_covid_7_day_sum
• staffed_pediatric_icu_bed_occupancy_7_day_avg
• staffed_pediatric_icu_bed_occupancy_7_day_coverage
• staffed_pediatric_icu_bed_occupancy_7_day_sum
• total_staffed_pediatric_icu_beds_7_day_avg
• total_staffed_pediatric_icu_beds_7_day_coverage
• total_staffed_pediatric_icu_beds_7_day_sum

On October 24, 2022, the data includes more analytical calculations in efforts to provide a cleaner dataset. For a raw version of this dataset, please follow this link: https://healthdata.gov/Hospital/COVID-19-Reported-Patient-Impact-and-Hospital-Capa/uqq2-txqb

Due to changes in reporting requirements, after June 19, 2023, a collection week is defined as starting on a Sunday and ending on the next Saturday.

There are many initiatives attempting to harmonize data collection across human clinical studies using common data elements (CDEs). The increased use of CDEs in large prior studies can guide researchers planning new studies. For that purpose, we analyzed the All of Us (AoU) program, an ongoing US study intending to enroll one million participants and serve as a platform for numerous observational analyses. AoU adopted the OMOP Common Data Model to standardize both research (Case Report Form [CRF]) and real-world (imported from Electronic Health Records [EHRs]) data. AoU standardized specific data elements and values by including CDEs from terminologies such as LOINC and SNOMED CT. For this study, we defined all elements from established terminologies as CDEs and all custom concepts created in the Participant Provided Information (PPI) terminology as unique data elements (UDEs). We found 1 033 research elements, 4 592 element-value combinations and 932 distinct values. Most elements were UDEs (869, 84.1%), while most CDEs were from LOINC (103 elements, 10.0%) or SNOMED CT (60, 5.8%). Of the LOINC CDEs, 87 (53.1% of 164 CDEs) originated from previous data collection initiatives, such as PhenX (17 CDEs) and PROMIS (15 CDEs). On a CRF level, The Basics (12 of 21 elements, 57.1%) and Lifestyle (10 of 14, 71.4%) were the only CRFs with multiple CDEs. On a value level, 61.7% of distinct values are from an established terminology. AoU demonstrates the use of the OMOP model for integrating research and routine healthcare data (64 elements in both contexts), which allows for monitoring lifestyle and health changes outside the research setting. The increased inclusion of CDEs in large studies (like AoU) is important in facilitating the use of existing tools and improving the ease of understanding and analyzing the data collected, which is more challenging when using study specific formats.

Snapshot img

Big Data Spending In Healthcare Sector Market Size 2025-2029

The big data spending in healthcare sector market size is forecast to increase by USD 7.78 billion at a CAGR of 10.2% between 2024 and 2029.

The market is driven by the growing need to improve business efficiency and the increasing use of big data analytics in healthcare. The healthcare industry is generating vast amounts of data daily, and harnessing this data through analytics can lead to enhanced patient care, operational efficiency, and research advancements. However, this trend faces significant challenges. Consumer behavior and customer experience are also under scrutiny, with data talent and natural language processing essential for last-mile delivery of personalized services.
Companies must navigate these complexities to effectively leverage data for improved patient outcomes and operational excellence. Ensuring the protection of sensitive health information is crucial to maintain patient trust and adhere to regulatory requirements. Data security and privacy concerns related to patients' medical data are becoming increasingly prominent. As the healthcare sector continues to digitize, addressing these challenges while capitalizing on the opportunities presented by big data analytics will be essential for market success. 

What will be the Size of the Big Data Spending In Healthcare Sector Market during the forecast period?

Explore in-depth regional segment analysis with market size data - historical 2019-2023 and forecasts 2025-2029 - in the full report.
Request Free Sample

In the dynamic healthcare sector, the adoption of big data has become a key driver for innovation and improvement. The market is witnessing significant investments in structured and unstructured data integration, ensuring data quality and security for data-driven decision-making. Risk management is a major focus, with predictive modeling and continuous intelligence enabling early fraud detection. The variety and velocity of data require advanced data analytics and machine learning techniques for effective decision-making. Data management and storage solutions in the cloud are increasingly popular due to their scalability and flexibility.

Semi-structured data and artificial intelligence are revolutionizing data visualization and enabling more accurate predictions, enhancing the overall value of big data in healthcare. The healthcare sector's big data landscape is continuously unfolding, with new applications and challenges emerging. Data integration and analytics are essential for making informed business decisions and improving patient care.

How is this Big Data Spending In Healthcare Sector Industry segmented?

The big data spending in healthcare sector industry research report provides comprehensive data (region-wise segment analysis), with forecasts and estimates in 'USD million' for the period 2025-2029, as well as historical data from 2019-2023 for the following segments.

Service

  Services
  Software


Type

  Descriptive analytics
  Predictive analytics
  Prescriptive analytics
  Diagnostic analytics


Application

  Financial analytics
  Population health management
  Clinical decision support
  Operational analytics
  Others


Geography

  North America

    US
    Canada


  Europe

    France
    Germany
    Ireland
    UK


  APAC

    China
    India
    Philippines


  South America

    Brazil


  Rest of World (ROW)

By Service Insights

The Services segment is estimated to witness significant growth during the forecast period. In the dynamic healthcare sector, the adoption of big data solutions is increasingly becoming a priority for organizations. The services segment, which includes professional services, consulting, and managed services, is experiencing significant growth. Professional services, offered by third-party analytics companies, provide tailor-made solutions for the healthcare industry. These services enable organizations to discover new revenue streams, enhance data security, and improve service support for increased productivity. The demand for industry-specific, consumer group-specific, and region-specific data analysis is on the rise due to intensifying competition and innovation. Consulting services, though holding a smaller revenue share, significantly contribute to the overall growth of the services segment.

Flexibility, continuous intelligence, and data visualization are crucial elements of these services, ensuring business value in the face of data volume and variety. Risk management, cyber attacks, data quality, and data breaches are major concerns, necessitating advanced solutions like AI, machine learning, and natural language processing. Data collection, data storage, and data integration are essential components of data management, which must address velocity, noise, and data overload. Cloud services, data la

This report describes the supplemental Mental Health Surveillance Study data collection to the 2012 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). The MHSS staffing, data collection procedures and materials, data collection staff training, response rates, and quality control procedures.