ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA
Is the quality of data in an electronic medical record sufficient for assessing the quality of primary care?
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 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Challenges for Data Quality in the Clinical Data Life Cycle: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Electronic health record data quality assessment and tools: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023Pooled it
- Observational
- Article
- Development of standard indicators to assess use of electronic health record systems implemented in low-and medium-income countries.PloS one · 2021Article
- Estimating Morbidity Rates Based on Routine Electronic Health Records in Primary Care: Observational Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2019Article
- Toward Standardized Monitoring of Patients With Chronic Diseases in Primary Care Using Electronic Medical Records: Systematic Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2019Review
- A basic model for assessing primary health care electronic medical record data quality.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2019Article
- Possible Sources of Bias in Primary Care Electronic Health Record Data Use and Reuse.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Article
- Article
- Improving the quality of EHR recording in primary care: a data quality feedback tool.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2017Article
- The need to scale up HIV indicator condition-guided testing for early case-finding: a case-control study in primary care.BMC family practice · 2016Article
- Validation of Stroke Meaningful Use Measures in a National Electronic Health Record System.Journal of general internal medicine · 2016Article
- Effect of pooled comparative information on judgments of quality.IEEE transactions on human-machine systems · 2015Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveQuality indicators for the treatment of type 2 diabetes are often retrieved from a chronic disease registry (CDR). This study investigates the quality of recording in a general practitioner's (GP) electronic medical record (EMR) compared to a simple, web-based CDR.
methodsThe GPs entered data directly in the CDR and in their own EMR during the study period (2011). We extracted data from 58 general practices (8235 patients) with type 2 diabetes and compared the occurrence and value of seven process indicators and 12 outcome indicators in both systems. The CDR, specifically designed for monitoring type 2 diabetes and reporting to health insurers, was used as the reference standard. For process indicators we examined the presence or absence of recordings on the patient level in both systems, for outcome indicators we examined the number of compliant or non-compliant values of recordings present in both systems. The diagnostic OR (DOR) was calculated for all indicators.
resultsWe found less concordance for process indicators than for outcome indicators. HbA1c testing was the process indicator with the highest DOR. Blood pressure measurement, urine albumin test, BMI recorded and eye assessment showed low DOR. For outcome indicators, the highest DOR was creatinine clearance <30 mL/min or mL/min/1.73 m(2) and the lowest DOR was systolic blood pressure <140 mm Hg.
conclusionsClinical items are not always adequately recorded in an EMR for retrieving indicators, but there is good concordance for the values of these items. If the quality of recording improves, indicators can be reported from the EMR, which will reduce the workload of GPs and enable GPs to maintain a good patient overview.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.