Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28173759›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2017

Utilising identifier error variation in linkage of large administrative data sources.

Katie Harron, Gareth Hagger-Johnson, Ruth Gilbert, Harvey Goldstein

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. GUILD: GUidance for Information about Linking Data sets.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2018
    Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A framework for a consistent and reproducible evaluation of manual review for patient matching algorithms.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Clinical Research Informatics: Contributions from 2017.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2018
    Review
  12. Demystifying probabilistic linkage: Common myths and misconceptions.International journal of population data science · 2018
    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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Katie HarronLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1 H 9SH, UK. Katie.harron@lshtm.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-3418-2856
Gareth Hagger-JohnsonAdministrative Data Research Centre for England, UCL, 222 Euston Road, London, NW1 2DA, UK.
Ruth GilbertAdministrative Data Research Centre for England and UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, London, WC1 N 1EH, UK.
Harvey GoldsteinUniversity of Bristol, Administrative Data Research Centre for England and UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, London, WC1 N 1EH, UK.
Health Data Research UK · GBLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Bristol · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K006584/1Wellcome Trust 103975/Z/14/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLinkage of administrative data sources often relies on probabilistic methods using a set of common identifiers (e.g. sex, date of birth, postcode). Variation in data quality on an individual or organisational level (e.g. by hospital) can result in clustering of identifier errors, violating the assumption of independence between identifiers required for traditional probabilistic match weight estimation. This potentially introduces selection bias to the resulting linked dataset. We aimed to measure variation in identifier error rates in a large English administrative data source (Hospital Episode Statistics; HES) and to incorporate this information into match weight calculation.

methodsWe used 30,000 randomly selected HES hospital admissions records of patients aged 0-1, 5-6 and 18-19 years, for 2011/2012, linked via NHS number with data from the Personal Demographic Service (PDS; our gold-standard). We calculated identifier error rates for sex, date of birth and postcode and used multi-level logistic regression to investigate associations with individual-level attributes (age, ethnicity, and gender) and organisational variation. We then derived: i) weights incorporating dependence between identifiers; ii) attribute-specific weights (varying by age, ethnicity and gender); and iii) organisation-specific weights (by hospital). Results were compared with traditional match weights using a simulation study.

resultsIdentifier errors (where values disagreed in linked HES-PDS records) or missing values were found in 0.11% of records for sex and date of birth and in 53% of records for postcode. Identifier error rates differed significantly by age, ethnicity and sex (p < 0.0005). Errors were less frequent in males, in 5-6 year olds and 18-19 year olds compared with infants, and were lowest for the Asian ethic group. A simulation study demonstrated that substantial bias was introduced into estimated readmission rates in the presence of identifier errors. Attribute- and organisational-specific weights reduced this bias compared with weights estimated using traditional probabilistic matching algorithms.

conclusionsWe provide empirical evidence on variation in rates of identifier error in a widely-used administrative data source and propose a new method for deriving match weights that incorporates additional data attributes. Our results demonstrate that incorporating information on variation by individual-level characteristics can help to reduce bias due to linkage error.

Indexed as

AdolescentAlgorithmsBiasChildChild, PreschoolComputer SimulationFemaleHospitalizationHumansInfantInfant, NewbornInformation Storage and RetrievalMaleMedical Record LinkageNational Health ProgramsRegistriesAdministrative dataData linkageHospital admissionLinkage errorLinkage evaluationRecord linkage

Identifiers

PMID28173759
PMCPMC5297137
OpenAlexW2587260557

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.