ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2024
Linkability measures to assess the data characteristics for record linkage.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Roles of Biomedical Informatics for an Equitable Learning Health System: Lessons from a Year of Scientific Informatics Literature.Methods of information in medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Accuracy of Probabilistic Record Linkage Across Sociodemographic Categories in 4 Databases: Exploratory Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Linking clinical trial data with real-world data for enhanced clinical evidence generation: methodological considerations and recommendations.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAccurate record linkage (RL) enables consolidation and de-duplication of data from disparate datasets, resulting in more comprehensive and complete patient data. However, conducting RL with low quality or unfit data can waste institutional resources on poor linkage results. We aim to evaluate data linkability to enhance the effectiveness of record linkage. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe describe a systematic approach using data fitness ("linkability") measures, defined as metrics that characterize the availability, discriminatory power, and distribution of potential variables for RL. We used the isolation forest algorithm to detect abnormal linkability values from 188 sites in Indiana and Colorado, and manually reviewed the data to understand the cause of anomalies.
resultWe calculated 10 linkability metrics for 11 potential linkage variables (LVs) across 188 sites for a total of 20 680 linkability metrics. Potential LVs such as first name, last name, date of birth, and sex have low missing data rates, while Social Security Number vary widely in completeness among all sites. We investigated anomalous linkability values to identify the cause of many records having identical values in certain LVs, issues with placeholder values disguising data missingness, and orphan records. DISCUSSION: The fitness of a variable for RL is determined by its availability and its discriminatory power to uniquely identify individuals. These results highlight the need for awareness of placeholder values, which inform the selection of variables and methods to optimize RL performance.
conclusionEvaluating linkability measures using the isolation forest algorithm to highlight anomalous findings can help identify fitness-for-use issues that must be addressed before initiating the RL process to ensure high-quality linkage outcomes.
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.