Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10641962›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

Exploring the degree of concordance of coded and textual data in answering clinical queries from a clinical data repository.

H D Stein, P Nadkarni, J Erdos, P L Miller

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Quantifying clinical data quality using relative gold standards.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2010
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. An electronic health record based on structured narrative.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

H D SteinYale University School of Medicine, Center for Medical Informatics, New Haven, Connecticut 06520-8009, USA. hdavid.stein@yale.edu
P Nadkarni
J Erdos
P L Miller

Funding

MEDICAL INFORMATICS RESEARCH TRAINING AT YALET15LM007056 · NLM · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI Mark Bender Gerstein, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 1987 to 2026
$22.2M
IAIMS IMPLEMENTATION AT YALEG08LM005583 · NLM · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI PATON, JOHN A · 1995 to 1999
–
NLM NIH HHS G08-LM05583NLM NIH HHS T15-LM07056
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo query a clinical data repository (CDR) for answers to clinical questions to determine whether different types of fields (coded and free text) would yield confirmatory, complementary, or conflicting information and to discuss the issues involved in producing the discrepancies between the fields.

methodsThe appropriate data fields in a subset of a CDR (5,135 patient records) were searched for the answers to three questions related to surgical procedures. Each search included at least one coded data field and at least one free-text field. The identified free-text records were then searched manually to ensure correct interpretation. The fields were then compared to determine whether they agreed with each other, were supportive of each other, contained no entry (absence of data), or were contradictory.

resultsThe degree of concordance varied greatly according to the field and the question asked. Some fields were not granular enough to answer the question. The free-text fields often gave an answer that was not definitive. Absence of data was most logically interpreted in some cases as lack of completion of data and in others as a negative answer. Even with a question as specific as which side a hernia was on, contradictory data were found in 5 to 8 percent of the records.

conclusionsUsing the data in the CDR to answer clinical questions can yield significantly disparate results depending on the question and which data fields are searched. A database cannot just be queried in automated fashion and the results reported. Both coded and textual fields must be searched to obtain the fullest assessment. This can be expected to result in information that may be confirmatory, complementary, or conflicting. To yield the most accurate information possible, final answers to questions require human judgment and may require the gathering of additional information.

Indexed as

Information Storage and RetrievalHernia, VentralHumansMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedPostoperative ComplicationsPulmonary EmbolismSurgical Wound Infection

Identifiers

PMID10641962
PMCPMC61454

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.