ArticleInternational journal of population data science2020
Indicators of missing Electronic Medical Record (EMR) discharge summaries: A retrospective study on Canadian data.
Article in International journal of population data science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Digital Health Data Quality Issues: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- Addressing Data Quality Challenges in Lung Cancer Data Within the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model: Observational Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Observational
- Rethinking Trust in Synthetic Health Data: Lessons From 7 European Research Initiatives.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Frameworks, Dimensions, Definitions of Aspects, and Assessment Methods for the Appraisal of Quality of Health Data for Secondary Use: Comprehensive Overview of Reviews.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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND
objectivesElectronic medical records (EMRs), specifically the discharge summary (DS), can improve secondary use data availability and interprofessional communication. We aimed to describe the completeness of our EMRs by assessing the presence of a DS in the EMR. Additionally, we assessed for indicators of a missing DS.
methodsA chart review was conducted on 3,011 non-obstetric adult inpatient charts in Calgary, Alberta. 893 charts were missing an electronic DS. A 10% sample was drawn to evaluate the presence of a paper DS. A Chi-square test, Fisher's test and logistic regression measured the associations between electronic DS absence and i) patient and hospital characteristics, and ii) patient comorbidities.
resultsThe univariate analyses showed that age, being a surgical patient, a Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) of </1, as well as patients with myocardial infarctions, congestive heart failure, cerebrovascular disease, dementia, chronic pulmonary disease, diabetes, and renal disease were associated with a missing DS. Those that were middle aged, surgical patients, or had fewer comorbidities were more likely to have a missing DS. Within the 10% sample, approximately 50% of all patients were from a surgical department, all of which were missing both electronic and paper discharge summaries.
conclusionsOur study describes indicators of missing electronic DS. The DS impacts interprofessional communication, patient outcomes, and data quality. Therefore, the implications of an incomplete DS are widespread. Our findings will caution future researchers using EMR data about the potential for incomplete data, particularly for patients who are surgical, middle aged, and have fewer comorbidities.
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.