ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2020
Comparing Methods for Record Linkage for Public Health Action: Matching Algorithm Validation Study.
Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Linking Electronic Health Records for Multiple Sclerosis Research: Comparative Study of Deterministic, Probabilistic, and Machine Learning Linkage Methods.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Using the ATra Black Box to Improve Public Health Data Linkages and Analytics in the DC Cohort Longitudinal HIV Study: Viewpoint on the Process and Findings.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Evaluating the utility of public-facing jail registers to inform public health practice, Washington state 2023.BMC public health · 2025Article
- The substance-exposed birthing person-infant/child dyad and health information exchange in the United States.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Challenges and Opportunities in Big Data Science to Address Health Inequities and Focus the HIV Response.Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2024Review
- Record Linkage for Malaria Deaths Data Recovery and Surveillance in Brazil.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2023Article
- Changes in Residential Greenspace and Birth Outcomes among Siblings: Differences by Maternal Race.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Enhancing Human Biomonitoring Studies through Linkage to Administrative Registers-Status in Europe.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- (Almost) all of entity resolution.Science advances · 2022Review
- Enhancing the ATra Black Box Matching Algorithm: Use of All Names for Deduplication Across Jurisdictions.Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMany public health departments use record linkage between surveillance data and external data sources to inform public health interventions. However, little guidance is available to inform these activities, and many health departments rely on deterministic algorithms that may miss many true matches. In the context of public health action, these missed matches lead to missed opportunities to deliver interventions and may exacerbate existing health inequities.
objectiveThis study aimed to compare the performance of record linkage algorithms commonly used in public health practice.
methodsWe compared five deterministic (exact, Stenger, Ocampo 1, Ocampo 2, and Bosh) and two probabilistic record linkage algorithms (fastLink and beta record linkage [BRL]) using simulations and a real-world scenario. We simulated pairs of datasets with varying numbers of errors per record and the number of matching records between the two datasets (ie, overlap). We matched the datasets using each algorithm and calculated their recall (ie, sensitivity, the proportion of true matches identified by the algorithm) and precision (ie, positive predictive value, the proportion of matches identified by the algorithm that were true matches). We estimated the average computation time by performing a match with each algorithm 20 times while varying the size of the datasets being matched. In a real-world scenario, HIV and sexually transmitted disease surveillance data from King County, Washington, were matched to identify people living with HIV who had a syphilis diagnosis in 2017. We calculated the recall and precision of each algorithm compared with a composite standard based on the agreement in matching decisions across all the algorithms and manual review.
resultsIn simulations, BRL and fastLink maintained a high recall at nearly all data quality levels, while being comparable with deterministic algorithms in terms of precision. Deterministic algorithms typically failed to identify matches in scenarios with low data quality. All the deterministic algorithms had a shorter average computation time than the probabilistic algorithms. BRL had the slowest overall computation time (14 min when both datasets contained 2000 records). In the real-world scenario, BRL had the lowest trade-off between recall (309/309, 100.0%) and precision (309/312, 99.0%).
conclusionsProbabilistic record linkage algorithms maximize the number of true matches identified, reducing gaps in the coverage of interventions and maximizing the reach of public health action.
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.