ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2021
Developing a Data Quality Standard Primer for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment from Electronic Health Record Data Using the DataGauge Process.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
The learning health systems aim to support the needs of patients with chronic diseases, which require methods that account for electronic health recorded (EHR) data limitations. EHR data is often used to calculate cardiovascular risk scores. However, it is unclear whether EHR data presents high enough quality to provide accurate estimates. Still, there is currently no open standard available to assess data quality for such applications. We applied the DataGauge process to develop a data quality standard based on expert clinical, analytical and informatics knowledge by conducting four interviews and one focus group that produced 61 individual data quality requirements. These requirements covered all standard data quality dimensions and uncovered 705 quality issues in EHR data for 456 patients. These requirements will be expanded and further validated in future work. Our work initiates the development of open and explicit data quality standards for specific secondary uses of clinical data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35308992PMC8861746What 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.