ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2024
Evaluating Linkage Quality of Population-Based Administrative Data for Health Service Research.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2024. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo overcome the limitations of relying on data from a single institution, many researchers have studied data linkage methodologies. Data linkage includes errors owing to legal issues surrounding personal information and technical issues related to data processing. Linkage errors affect selection bias, and external and internal validity. Therefore, quality verification for each connection method with adherence to personal information protection is an important issue. This study evaluated the linkage quality of linked data and analyzed the potential bias resulting from linkage errors.
methodsThis study analyzed claims data submitted to the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA DATA). The linkage errors of the two deterministic linkage methods were evaluated based on the use of the match key. The first deterministic linkage uses a unique identification number, and the second deterministic linkage uses the name, gender, and date of birth as a set of partial identifiers. The linkage error included in this deterministic linkage method was compared with the absolute standardized difference (ASD) of Cohen's according to the baseline characteristics, and the linkage quality was evaluated through the following indicators: linked rate, false match rate, missed match rate, positive predictive value, sensitivity, specificity, and F1-score.
resultsFor the deterministic linkage method that used the name, gender, and date of birth as a set of partial identifiers, the true match rate was 83.5 and the missed match rate was 16.5. Although there was bias in some characteristics of the data, most of the ASD values were less than 0.1, with no case greater than 0.5. Therefore, it is difficult to determine whether linked data constructed with deterministic linkages have substantial differences.
conclusionThis study confirms the possibility of building health and medical data at the national level as the first data linkage quality verification study using big data from the HIRA. Analyzing the quality of linkages is crucial for comprehending linkage errors and generating reliable analytical outcomes. Linkers should increase the reliability of linked data by providing linkage error-related information to researchers. The results of this study will serve as reference data to increase the reliability of multicenter data linkage studies.
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.