Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22195084›Full record

ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2011

Electronic laboratory data quality and the value of a health information exchange to support public health reporting processes.

Brian E Dixon, Julie J McGowan, Shaun J Grannis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Towards public health decision support: a systematic review of bidirectional communication approaches.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2013
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. LabRS: A Rosetta stone for retrospective standardization of clinical laboratory test results.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Brian E DixonIndiana University, School of Informatics, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Julie J McGowan
Shaun J Grannis

Funding

PHITPO CDC HHS 1P01HK000077-01PHITPO CDC HHS P01 HK000077
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is increasing interest in leveraging electronic health data across disparate sources for a variety of uses. A fallacy often held by data consumers is that clinical data quality is homogeneous across sources. We examined one attribute of data quality, completeness, in the context of electronic laboratory reporting of notifiable disease information. We evaluated 7.5 million laboratory reports from clinical information systems for their completeness with respect to data needed for public health reporting processes. We also examined the impact of health information exchange (HIE) enhancement methods that attempt to improve completeness. The laboratory data were heterogeneous in their completeness. Fields identifying the patient and test results were usually complete. Fields containing patient demographics, patient contact information, and provider contact information were suboptimal. Data processed by the HIE were often more complete, suggesting that HIEs can support improvements to existing public health reporting processes.

Indexed as

Clinical Laboratory Information SystemsDisease NotificationElectronic Health RecordsHumansMedical Record LinkageMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedPopulation SurveillancePublic HealthUnited States

Identifiers

PMID22195084
PMCPMC3243173

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.