ArticlePerspectives in health information managemen2019
Data Quality Assessment in Emergency Medical Services: What Are the Stakeholders' Perspectives?
Article in Perspectives in health information managemen, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reflexive thematic analysis of emergency department medical records of dementia patients regarding the identification of last days of life.Palliative & supportive care · 2025Article
- The challenges and opportunities of continuous data quality improvement for healthcare administration data.JAMIA open · 2024Article
- Emergency department-based injury surveillance information system: a conceptual model.BMC emergency medicine · 2023Article
- Data quality assessment in emergency medical services: an objective approach.BMC emergency medicine · 2023Article
- Metadata integrity in bioinformatics: Bridging the gap between data and knowledge.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2023Review
- Management of multiple traumas in emergency medicine department: A review.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Emergency care is usually conducted within limited time and with limited resources. During emergency care processes, data quality issues should be taken into account. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of emergency care data from the perspectives of different data stakeholders. Method: This survey study was conducted in 2017. In this research, the viewpoints of three groups of data stakeholders, including data producers, data collectors, and data consumers, were collected regarding data quality in emergency care services. Data were collected by using a standard information quality assessment questionnaire. Results: The mean values for each dimension of data quality were as follows: sound data (6.23), dependable data (6.28), useful data (6.30), and usable data (6.35), with 0 being the lowest possible score and 10 being the highest. The role gap analysis suggested a clear gap between data producers and data customers at the university level. Conclusion: Overall, data quality in emergency medical services was not at a high level. Although data quality was improving, the levels of data completeness, compatibility, and usability were low. To improve the usability of emergency medical service data, more attention should be paid to the dimensions of accuracy, completeness, and consistency of data sources.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30766454PMC6341415What 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.