Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35909667›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied statistics2022

A simple two-step procedure using the Fellegi-Sunter model for frequency-based record linkage.

Huiping Xu, Xiaochun Li, Shaun Grannis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied statistics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Huiping XuDepartment of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Xiaochun LiDepartment of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Shaun GrannisRegenstrief Institute Inc., Indianapolis, IN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The widely used Fellegi-Sunter model for probabilistic record linkage does not leverage information contained in field values and consequently leads to identical classification of match status regardless of whether records agree on rare or common values. Since agreement on rare values is less likely to occur by chance than agreement on common values, records agreeing on rare values are more likely to be matches. Existing frequency-based methods typically rely on knowledge of error probabilities associated with field values and frequencies of agreed field values among matches, often derived using prior studies or training data. When such information is unavailable, applications of these methods are challenging. In this paper, we propose a simple two-step procedure for frequency-based matching using the Fellegi-Sunter framework to overcome these challenges. Matching weights are adjusted based on frequency distributions of the agreed field values among matches and non-matches, estimated by the Fellegi-Sunter model without relying on prior studies or training data. Through a real-world application and simulation, our method is found to produce comparable or better performance than the unadjusted method. Furthermore, frequency-based matching provides greater improvement in matching accuracy when using poorly discriminating fields with diminished benefit as the discriminating power of matching fields increases.

Indexed as

Fellegi–Sunter modelfrequency-based matchinglatent class analysisprobabilistic matchingrecord linkage

Identifiers

PMID35909667
PMCPMC9336505

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.