Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29854176›Full record

ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2017

A Framework for Data Quality Assessment in Clinical Research Datasets.

Kathleen Lee, Nicole Weiskopf, Jyotishman Pathak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing 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

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

  1. Electronic health record data quality assessment and tools: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Digital Health Data Quality Issues: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The Use of AI for Phenotype-Genotype Mapping.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  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

3 authors.

Kathleen LeeWeill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.
Nicole WeiskopfOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR.
Jyotishman PathakWeill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.

Funding

National Infrastructure for Standardized and Portable EHR Phenotyping AlgorithmsR01GM105688 · NIGMS · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI LUO, YUAN, PATHAK, JYOTISHMAN · 2013 to 2020
$5.7M
Informatics Tools for Pharmacogenomic Discovery using Practice-based DataR01GM103859 · NIGMS · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI DENNY, JOSHUA C., PATHAK, JYOTISHMAN · 2014 to 2017
$2.4M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM103859NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM105688
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The wide availability of electronic health record (EHR) data for multi-institutional clinical research relies on accurately defined patient cohorts to ensure validity, especially when used in conjunction with open-access research data. There is a growing need to utilize a consensus-driven approach to assess data quality. To achieve this goal, we modified an existing data quality assessment (DQA) framework by re-operationalizing dimensions of quality for a clinical domain of interest - heart failure. We then created an inventory of common phenotype data elements (CPDEs) derived from open-access datasets and evaluated it against the modified DQA framework. We measured our inventory of CPDEs for

Indexed as

Data AccuracyDatasets as TopicElectronic Health RecordsHeart FailureHumans

Identifiers

PMID29854176
PMCPMC5977591

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.