Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27852603›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2016

Controlling for Informed Presence Bias Due to the Number of Health Encounters in an Electronic Health Record.

Benjamin A Goldstein, Nrupen A Bhavsar, Matthew Phelan, Michael J Pencina

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 114 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
114citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

114 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

54 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Benjamin A Goldstein
Nrupen A Bhavsar
Matthew Phelan
Michael J Pencina

Funding

Understanding and predicting cardiac events in HD using real-time EHRsK25DK097279 · NIDDK · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI GOLDSTEIN, BENJAMIN ALAN · 2013 to 2017
$797k
NIDDK NIH HHS K25 DK097279
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electronic health records (EHRs) are an increasingly utilized resource for clinical research. While their size allows for many analytical opportunities, as with most observational data there is also the potential for bias. One of the key sources of bias in EHRs is what we term informed presence-the notion that inclusion in an EHR is not random but rather indicates that the subject is ill, making people in EHRs systematically different from those not in EHRs. In this article, we use simulated and empirical data to illustrate the conditions under which such bias can arise and how conditioning on the number of health-care encounters can be one way to remove this bias. In doing so, we also show when such an approach can impart M bias, or bias from conditioning on a collider. Finally, we explore the conditions under which number of medical encounters can serve as a proxy for general health. We apply these methods to an EHR data set from a university medical center covering the years 2007-2013.

Indexed as

Epidemiologic Research DesignSelection BiasBiomedical ResearchComputer SimulationConfounding Factors, EpidemiologicDepressionDiabetes MellitusElectronic Health RecordsHealth ServicesHealth StatusHumansReproducibility of ResultsBerkson's biasbias (epidemiology)confounding factors (epidemiology)electronic health recordsepidemiologic methods

Identifiers

PMID27852603
PMCPMC5152663

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.