Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31841149›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2020

Understanding and detecting defects in healthcare administration data: Toward higher data quality to better support healthcare operations and decisions.

Yili Zhang, Güneş Koru

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. The bird's-eye view: A data-driven approach to understanding patient journeys from claims data.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020
    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

2 authors.

Yili ZhangDepartment of Information Systems, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Güneş KoruDepartment of Information Systems, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveDevelopment of systematic approaches for understanding and assessing data quality is becoming increasingly important as the volume and utilization of health data steadily increases. In this study, a taxonomy of data defects was developed and utilized when automatically detecting defects to assess Medicaid data quality maintained by one of the states in the United States. MATERIALS AND

methodsThere were more than 2.23 million rows and 32 million cells in the Medicaid data examined. The taxonomy was developed through document review, descriptive data analysis, and literature review. A software program was created to automatically detect defects by using a set of constraints whose development was facilitated by the taxonomy.

resultsFive major categories and seventeen subcategories of defects were identified. The major categories are missingness, incorrectness, syntax violation, semantic violation, and duplicity. More than 3 million defects were detected indicating substantial problems with data quality. Defect density exceeded 10% in five tables. The majority of the data defects belonged to format mismatch, invalid code, dependency-contract violation, and implausible value types. Such contextual knowledge can support prioritized quality improvement initiatives for the Medicaid data studied.

conclusionsThis research took the initial steps to understand the types of data defects and detect defects in large healthcare datasets. The results generally suggest that healthcare organizations can potentially benefit from focusing on data quality improvement. For those purposes, the taxonomy developed and the approach followed in this study can be adopted.

Indexed as

Data AccuracyQuality ImprovementDatasets as TopicDelivery of Health CareHumansMedicaidSoftwareUnited Statesdata defectdata qualitydefect taxonomyhealthcare administrationMedicaid management information system

Identifiers

PMID31841149
PMCPMC7647275

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.