SynthesisBMJ open2023
Evaluation of the reported data linkage process and associated quality issues for linked routinely collected healthcare data in multimorbidity research: a systematic methodology review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Identifying, handling and impact of immortal time bias on addressing treatment effects in observational studies using routinely collected data.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Pooled it
- Using electronic health records to understand multimorbidity in older people: a scoping review.European geriatric medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluating the agreement between sensitivity and primary analyses in observational studies using routinely collected healthcare data: a meta-epidemiology study.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- The nature and extent of the literature on linked reproductive health datasets in the UK: a scoping review.International journal of population data science · 2025Article
- Multimorbidity in elderly patients with or without T2DM: A real-world cross-sectional analysis based on primary care and hospitalisation data.Journal of global health · 2024Article
- Lowering Barriers to Health Risk Assessments in Promoting Personalized Health Management.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- The epidemiology of road traffic injuries in the republic of Serbia: a study based on hospital data, 2015-2019.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this systematic review was to examine how the record linkage process is reported in multimorbidity research.
methodsA systematic search was conducted in Medline, Web of Science and Embase using predefined search terms, and inclusion and exclusion criteria. Published studies from 2010 to 2020 using linked routinely collected data for multimorbidity research were included. Information was extracted on how the linkage process was reported, which conditions were studied together, which data sources were used, as well as challenges encountered during the linkage process or with the linked dataset.
resultsTwenty studies were included. Fourteen studies received the linked dataset from a trusted third party. Eight studies reported variables used for the data linkage, while only two studies reported conducting prelinkage checks. The quality of the linkage was only reported by three studies, where two reported linkage rate and one raw linkage figures. Only one study checked for bias by comparing patient characteristics of linked and non-linked records.
conclusionsThe linkage process was poorly reported in multimorbidity research, even though this might introduce bias and potentially lead to inaccurate inferences drawn from the results. There is therefore a need for increased awareness of linkage bias and transparency of the linkage processes, which could be achieved through better adherence to reporting guidelines. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021243188.
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.