Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35568993›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2022

Evaluation of real-world referential and probabilistic patient matching to advance patient identification strategy.

Shaun J Grannis, Jennifer L Williams, Suranga Kasthuri, Molly Murray, Huiping Xu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. A framework for a consistent and reproducible evaluation of manual review for patient matching algorithms.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    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

5 authors.

Shaun J GrannisDepartment of Family Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8093-6639
Jennifer L WilliamsRegenstrief Institute, Center for Biomedical Informatics, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
Suranga KasthuriRegenstrief Institute, Center for Biomedical Informatics, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
Molly MurrayPew Charitable Trust, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Huiping XuDepartment of Biostatistics, IU Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.

Funding

California HealthCare Foundation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study sought both to support evidence-based patient identity policy development by illustrating an approach for formally evaluating operational matching methods, and also to characterize the performance of both referential and probabilistic patient matching algorithms using real-world demographic data. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe assessed matching accuracy for referential and probabilistic matching algorithms using a manually reviewed 30 000 record gold standard reference dataset derived from a large health information exchange containing over 47 million patient registrations. We applied referential and probabilistic algorithms to this dataset and compared the outputs to the gold standard. We computed performance metrics including sensitivity (recall), positive predictive value (precision), and F-score for each algorithm.

resultsThe probabilistic algorithm exhibited sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), and F-score of .6366, 0.9995, and 0.7778, respectively. The referential algorithm exhibited corresponding sensitivity, PPV, and F-score values of 0.9351, 0.9996, and 0.9663, respectively. Treating discordant and limited-data records as nonmatches increased referential match sensitivity to 0.9578. Compared to the more traditional probabilistic approach, referential matching exhibits greater accuracy.

conclusionsReferential patient matching, an increasingly popular method among health IT vendors, demonstrated notably greater accuracy than a more traditional probabilistic approach without the adaptation of the algorithm to the data that the traditional probabilistic approach usually requires. Health IT policymakers, including the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC), should explore strategies to expand the evidence base for real-world matching system performance, given the need for an evidence-based patient identity strategy.

Indexed as

Health Information ExchangeMedical Record LinkageAlgorithmsHumanshealth IT policyidentity managementpatient identificationpatient matchingrecord linkage

Identifiers

PMID35568993
PMCPMC9277641

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.