ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2024
Development of a quantitative index system for evaluating the quality of electronic medical records in disease risk intelligent prediction.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Expert narrative review on the impact of value-based healthcare on medical quality and patient safety system restructuring.BMC health services research · 2026Pooled it
- Design and evaluation of an automated pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia registry from clinical data warehouses.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Quantitative evaluation of China's smart aging healthcare policy under the background of silver economy development: based on PMC model.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- AI reshaping life sciences: intelligent transformation, application challenges, and future convergence in neuroscience, biology, and medicine.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to develop and validate a quantitative index system for evaluating the data quality of Electronic Medical Records (EMR) in disease risk prediction using Machine Learning (ML). MATERIALS AND
methodsThe index system was developed in four steps: (1) a preliminary index system was outlined based on literature review; (2) we utilized the Delphi method to structure the indicators at all levels; (3) the weights of these indicators were determined using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method; and (4) the developed index system was empirically validated using real-world EMR data in a ML-based disease risk prediction task.
resultsThe synthesis of review findings and the expert consultations led to the formulation of a three-level index system with four first-level, 11 second-level, and 33 third-level indicators. The weights of these indicators were obtained through the AHP method. Results from the empirical analysis illustrated a positive relationship between the scores assigned by the proposed index system and the predictive performances of the datasets. DISCUSSION: The proposed index system for evaluating EMR data quality is grounded in extensive literature analysis and expert consultation. Moreover, the system's high reliability and suitability has been affirmed through empirical validation.
conclusionThe novel index system offers a robust framework for assessing the quality and suitability of EMR data in ML-based disease risk predictions. It can serve as a guide in building EMR databases, improving EMR data quality control, and generating reliable real-world evidence.
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.