ReviewClinics in colon and rectal surgery2019
Electronic Health Record-Based Registries: Clinical Research Using Registries in Colon and Rectal Surgery.
Review in Clinics in colon and rectal surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Creation of a Retinoblastoma Registry in a Resource-Limited Country in Sub-Saharan Africa.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- The emerging economic evidence and methods used to evaluate clinical registries: a systematic scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Semantic Interoperability of Electronic Health Records: Systematic Review of Alternative Approaches for Enhancing Patient Information Availability.JMIR medical informatics · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electronic health records (EHRs) or electronic medical records (EMRs) contain a vast amount of clinical data that can be useful for multiple purposes including research. Disease registries are collections of data in predefined formats for population management, research, and other purposes. There are differences between EHRs and registries in the data structure, data standards, and protocols. Proprietary EHR systems use different coding systems and data standards, which are usually kept secret. For EHR data to flow seamlessly into registries, there is the need for interoperability between EHR systems and between EHRs and registries. The levels of interoperability required include functional, structural, and semantic interoperability. EHR data can be manually mapped to registry data, but that is a tedious, resource-intensive endeavor. The development of data standards that can be used as building blocks for both EHRs and registries will help overcome the problem of interoperability.
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.