Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27348111›Full record

ArticleCanadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique2016

Quality of administrative health databases in Canada: A scoping review.

Aynslie Hinds, Lisa M Lix, Mark Smith, Hude Quan, Claudia Sanmartin

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2023
    Article
  13. Critical evaluation of novel health system interventions is essential.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2023
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

5 authors.

Aynslie HindsDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, S113-750 Bannatyne Avenue, Winnipeg, MB, R3E 0W3, Canada.
Lisa M LixDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, S113-750 Bannatyne Avenue, Winnipeg, MB, R3E 0W3, Canada. Lisa.Lix@umanitoba.ca.
Mark SmithManitoba Centre for Health Policy, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Hude QuanDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Claudia SanmartinStatsCan, Health Analysis Division, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAdministrative health databases are increasingly used to conduct population-based health research and surveillance; this has resulted in a corresponding growth in studies about their quality. Our objective was to describe the characteristics of published Canadian studies about administrative health database quality.

methodsPubMed, Scopus, and Google Advanced were searched, along with websites of relevant organizations. English-language studies that evaluated the quality of one or more Canadian administrative health databases between 2004 and 2014 were selected for inclusion. Extracted information included data quality concepts and measures, year and type of publication, type of database, and geographic origin. SYNTHESIS: More than 3,000 publications were identified fromthe search. Twelve reports and 144 peer-reviewed papers were included. The majority (53.5%) of peer-review publications used databases from Ontario and Alberta, while 67% of the non-peer-review publications used data from multiple provinces/ territories. Almost all peer-reviewed papers (97.2%) were validation studies. Hospital discharge abstracts and physician billing claims were the most frequently validated databases. Approximately half of the publications (53.0%) validated case definitions and 37.7% focused on a chronic physical health condition.

conclusionGaps in the Canadian administrative data quality literature include a limited number of studies evaluating data from the Maritimes and across multiple jurisdictions, newer data sources, validating methods for identifying individuals with mental illness, and assessing the completeness and serviceability of the data. Data quality studies can aid researchers to understand the strengths and limitations of the data.

Indexed as

CanadaDatabases, FactualElectronic Health RecordsHumans

Identifiers

PMID27348111
PMCPMC6972121

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.