Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31633184›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of epidemiology2019

Reflections on modern methods: linkage error bias.

James C Doidge, Katie L Harron

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of epidemiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 35 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Clinical Indicators for Asthma-COPD Overlap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. False Discovery Estimation in Record Linkage.Statistics in medicine · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Linking digital footprint data into longitudinal population studies.International journal of population data science · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

James C DoidgeIntensive Care National Audit and Research Centre, London, UK.
Katie L HarronUCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

Department of HealthMedical Research Council MR/ K006584/1Medical Research Council MR/K006584/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 103975/Z/14/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Linked data are increasingly being used for epidemiological research, to enhance primary research, and in planning, monitoring and evaluating public policy and services. Linkage error (missed links between records that relate to the same person or false links between unrelated records) can manifest in many ways: as missing data, measurement error and misclassification, unrepresentative sampling, or as a special combination of these that is specific to analysis of linked data: the merging and splitting of people that can occur when two hospital admission records are counted as one person admitted twice if linked and two people admitted once if not. Through these mechanisms, linkage error can ultimately lead to information bias and selection bias; so identifying relevant mechanisms is key in quantitative bias analysis. In this article we introduce five key concepts and a study classification system for identifying which mechanisms are relevant to any given analysis. We provide examples and discuss options for estimating parameters for bias analysis. This conceptual framework provides the 'links' between linkage error, information bias and selection bias, and lays the groundwork for quantitative bias analysis for linkage error.

Indexed as

Data AccuracyHospitalizationHumansMedical Record LinkageSelection BiasSemantic Webbiasbias analysisdata linkageinformation biasLinkage errormissing dataquantitative bias analysisrecord linkageselection biassensitivity analysis

Identifiers

PMID31633184
PMCPMC7020770

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.