ArticleContraception2018
Use of an electronic health record data sharing system for identifying current contraceptive use within the WWAMI region Practice and Research Network.
Article in Contraception, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Web-Based Survey Piloting Process as a Model for Developing and Testing Past Contraceptive Use and Pregnancy History: Cystic Fibrosis Case Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- A model for building a national, patient-driven database to track contraceptive use in women with rare diseases.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022Article
- Long-Acting Reversible Contraception: Placement, Continuation, and Removal Rates at an Inner-City Academic Medical Center Clinic.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Contraceptive use among women with cystic fibrosis: A pilot study linking reproductive health questions to the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation National Patient Registry.Contraception · 2020Article
- An Experience of Electronic Health Records Implementation in a Mexican Region.Journal of medical systems · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the ability of electronic health record (EHR) data extracted into a data-sharing system to accurately identify contraceptive use. STUDY
designWe compared rates of contraceptive use from electronic extraction of EHR data via a data-sharing system and manual abstraction of the EHR among 142 female patients ages 15-49 years from a family medicine clinic within a primary care practice-based research network (PBRN). Cohen's kappa coefficient measured agreement between electronic extraction and manual abstraction.
resultsManual abstraction identified 62% of women as contraceptive users, whereas electronic extraction identified only 27%. Long acting reversible (LARC) methods had 96% agreement (Cohen's kappa 0.78; confidence interval, 0.57-0.99) between electronic extraction and manual abstraction. EHR data extracted via a data-sharing system was unable to identify barrier or over-the-counter contraceptives.
conclusionsElectronic extraction found substantially lower overall rates of contraceptive method use, but produced more comparable LARC method use rates when compared to manual abstraction among women in this study's primary care clinic. IMPLICATIONS: Quality metrics related to contraceptive use that rely on EHR data in this study's data-sharing system likely under-estimated true contraceptive use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.