Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29206922›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2018

PIE: A prior knowledge guided integrated likelihood estimation method for bias reduction in association studies using electronic health records data.

Jing Huang, Rui Duan, Rebecca A Hubbard, Yonghui Wu, Jason H Moore, Hua Xu, Yong Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. A framework for understanding selection bias in real-world healthcare data.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A, (Statistics in Society) · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Semi-supervised ROC analysis for reliable and streamlined evaluation of phenotyping algorithms.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Clinical Research Informatics: Contributions from 2017.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2018
    Review
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

7 authors.

Jing HuangPerelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Rui DuanPerelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Rebecca A HubbardPerelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Yonghui WuSchool of Biomedical Informatics, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Jason H MoorePerelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Hua XuSchool of Biomedical Informatics, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Yong ChenPerelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Funding

Furthering scientific understanding of mechanisms underlying resilience to the effects of AD pathology by incorporating state of the art quantification of gliosis, inflammation, & synaptic toxicityU01AG006781 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI CRANE, PAUL K, LARSON, ERIC B · 1986 to 2020
$39.3M
Advancing Cancer Pharmacoepidemiology Research Through EHRs and InformaticsU24CA194215 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI TAO, CUI, YANG, PING · 2016 to 2020
$3.3M
A General Framework to Account for Outcome Reporting Bias in Systematic ReviewsR01LM012607 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI CHEN, YONG · 2017 to 2020
$1.4M
NCI NIH HHS U24 CA194215NIA NIH HHS U01 AG006781NLM NIH HHS R01 LM012607
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study proposes a novel Prior knowledge guided Integrated likelihood Estimation (PIE) method to correct bias in estimations of associations due to misclassification of electronic health record (EHR)-derived binary phenotypes, and evaluates the performance of the proposed method by comparing it to 2 methods in common practice.

methodsWe conducted simulation studies and data analysis of real EHR-derived data on diabetes from Kaiser Permanente Washington to compare the estimation bias of associations using the proposed method, the method ignoring phenotyping errors, the maximum likelihood method with misspecified sensitivity and specificity, and the maximum likelihood method with correctly specified sensitivity and specificity (gold standard). The proposed method effectively leverages available information on phenotyping accuracy to construct a prior distribution for sensitivity and specificity, and incorporates this prior information through the integrated likelihood for bias reduction.

resultsOur simulation studies and real data application demonstrated that the proposed method effectively reduces the estimation bias compared to the 2 current methods. It performed almost as well as the gold standard method when the prior had highest density around true sensitivity and specificity. The analysis of EHR data from Kaiser Permanente Washington showed that the estimated associations from PIE were very close to the estimates from the gold standard method and reduced bias by 60%-100% compared to the 2 commonly used methods in current practice for EHR data.

conclusionsThis study demonstrates that the proposed method can effectively reduce estimation bias caused by imperfect phenotyping in EHR-derived data by incorporating prior information through integrated likelihood.

Indexed as

association studybias reductionelectronic health recordmisclassificationprior information

Identifiers

PMID29206922
PMCPMC7378882

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.