Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39158950›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2024

Evaluating and Enhancing the Fitness-for-Purpose of Electronic Health Record Data: Qualitative Study on Current Practices and Pathway to an Automated Approach Within the Medical Informatics for Research and Care in University Medicine Consortium.

Gaetan Kamdje Wabo, Preetha Moorthy, Fabian Siegel, Susanne A Seuchter, Thomas Ganslandt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Gaetan Kamdje WaboCenter for Preventive Medicine and Digital Health Baden-Wuerttemberg, Department of Biomedical Informatics, Medical Faculty of Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1053-6162
Preetha MoorthyCenter for Preventive Medicine and Digital Health Baden-Wuerttemberg, Department of Biomedical Informatics, Medical Faculty of Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5269-5287
Fabian SiegelCenter for Preventive Medicine and Digital Health Baden-Wuerttemberg, Department of Biomedical Informatics, Medical Faculty of Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9673-5030
Susanne A SeuchterMedical Center for Information and Communication Technology, Erlangen University Hospital, Erlangen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-2890-0280
Thomas GanslandtMedical Center for Information and Communication Technology, Erlangen University Hospital, Erlangen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6864-8936

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLeveraging electronic health record (EHR) data for clinical or research purposes heavily depends on data fitness. However, there is a lack of standardized frameworks to evaluate EHR data suitability, leading to inconsistent quality in data use projects (DUPs). This research focuses on the Medical Informatics for Research and Care in University Medicine (MIRACUM) Data Integration Centers (DICs) and examines empirical practices on assessing and automating the fitness-for-purpose of clinical data in German DIC settings.

objectiveThe study aims (1) to capture and discuss how MIRACUM DICs evaluate and enhance the fitness-for-purpose of observational health care data and examine the alignment with existing recommendations and (2) to identify the requirements for designing and implementing a computer-assisted solution to evaluate EHR data fitness within MIRACUM DICs.

methodsA qualitative approach was followed using an open-ended survey across DICs of 10 German university hospitals affiliated with MIRACUM. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis following an inductive qualitative method.

resultsAll 10 MIRACUM DICs participated, with 17 participants revealing various approaches to assessing data fitness, including the 4-eyes principle and data consistency checks such as cross-system data value comparison. Common practices included a DUP-related feedback loop on data fitness and using self-designed dashboards for monitoring. Most experts had a computer science background and a master's degree, suggesting strong technological proficiency but potentially lacking clinical or statistical expertise. Nine key requirements for a computer-assisted solution were identified, including flexibility, understandability, extendibility, and practicability. Participants used heterogeneous data repositories for evaluating data quality criteria and practical strategies to communicate with research and clinical teams.

conclusionsThe study identifies gaps between current practices in MIRACUM DICs and existing recommendations, offering insights into the complexities of assessing and reporting clinical data fitness. Additionally, a tripartite modular framework for fitness-for-purpose assessment was introduced to streamline the forthcoming implementation. It provides valuable input for developing and integrating an automated solution across multiple locations. This may include statistical comparisons to advanced machine learning algorithms for operationalizing frameworks such as the 3×3 data quality assessment framework. These findings provide foundational evidence for future design and implementation studies to enhance data quality assessments for specific DUPs in observational health care settings.

Indexed as

data integration centerdata qualitydata sciencedata useEHREHR dataEHRselectronic health recordfitness-for-purposeintegrationmedical informaticsMedical Informatics for Research and Care in University MedicineMedical Informatics InitiativeMIRACUM consortiumrecordrecordssecondary usesurveysurveysthematic analysisvisualizationvisualizations

Identifiers

PMID39158950
PMCPMC11369535

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.