Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35633879›Full record

ArticleCurrent epidemiology reports2018

Measurement error and misclassification in electronic medical records: methods to mitigate bias.

Jessica C Young, Mitchell M Conover, Michele Jonsson Funk

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current epidemiology reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Modern sources of controls in case-control studies.American journal of epidemiology · 2025
    Article
  17. Evaluation of the impact of defining observable time in real-world data on outcome incidence.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. The association between allostatic load and lymphedema in breast cancer survivors.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Jessica C YoungDepartment of Epidemiology, UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Mitchell M ConoverDepartment of Epidemiology, UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Michele Jonsson FunkDepartment of Epidemiology, UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Funding

North Carolina Translational & Clinical Sciences Institute (NC TraCS)UL1TR001111 · NCATS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BUSE, JOHN BERNARD, CAREY, TIMOTHY S · 2013 to 2017
$43.9M
Propensity scores and preventive drug use in the elderlyR01AG056479 · NIA · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Til Sturmer · 2017 to 2026
$5.0M
Methods for Estimating Sex Differences in Safety and Effectiveness of DrugsR01HL118255 · NHLBI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI JONSSON FUNK, MICHELE LAURA · 2014 to 2017
$1.7M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001111NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL118255NIA NIH HHS R01 AG056479
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewWe sought to: 1) examine common sources of measurement error in research using data from electronic medical records (EMR), 2) discuss methods to assess the extent and type of measurement error, and 3) describe recent developments in methods to address this source of bias. RECENT

findingsWe identified eight sources of measurement error frequently encountered in EMR studies, the most prominent being that EMR data usually reflect only the health services and medications delivered within the specific health facility/system contributing to the EMR data. Methods for assessing measurement error in EMR data usually require gold standard or validation data, which may be possible using data linkage. Recent methodological developments to address the impact of measurement error in EMR analyses were particularly rich in the multiple imputation literature. SUMMARY: Presently, sources of measurement error impacting EMR studies are still being elucidated, as are methods for assessing and addressing them. Given the magnitude of measurement error that has been reported, investigators are urged to carefully evaluate and rigorously address this potential source of bias in studies based in EMR data.

Indexed as

Comparative effectivenessElectronic medical recordsMeasurement errorMisclassificationmultiple imputation for measurement errorPharmacoepidemiologyReal world evidence

Identifiers

PMID35633879
PMCPMC9141310

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.