Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39568629›Full record

ArticleBMJ public health2024

Addressing Selection Biases within Electronic Health Record Data for Estimation of Diabetes Prevalence among New York City Young Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Sarah Conderino, Lorna E Thorpe, Jasmin Divers, Sandra S Albrecht, Shannon M Farley, David C Lee, Rebecca Anthopolos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

7 authors.

Sarah ConderinoDepartment of Population Health, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Lorna E ThorpeDepartment of Population Health, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Jasmin DiversDepartment of Population Health, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Sandra S AlbrechtDepartment of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Shannon M FarleyICAP at Columbia University, New York City, New York, USA.
David C LeeDepartment of Population Health, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Rebecca AnthopolosDepartment of Population Health, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

Mentoring patient-oriented research to improve cardiovascular health among people with HIV in sub-Saharan AfricaK24HL166024 · NHLBI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI MARK J SIEDNER · 2022 to 2026
$616k
NYU DiCAYA Coordinating Center (COC)U18DP006510 · DP · NYU WINTHROP HOSPITAL · PI DIVERS, JASMIN, THORPE, LORNA · 2020 to 2020
$500k
NCCDPHP CDC HHS U18 DP006510
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: There is growing interest in using electronic health records (EHRs) for chronic disease surveillance. However, these data are convenience samples of in-care individuals, which are not representative of target populations for public health surveillance, generally defined, for the relevant period, as resident populations within city, state, or other jurisdictions. We focus on using EHR data for estimation of diabetes prevalence among young adults in New York City, as rising diabetes burden in younger ages call for better surveillance capacity. Methods: This article applies common nonprobability sampling methods, including raking, post-stratification, and multilevel regression with post-stratification, to real and simulated data for the cross-sectional estimation of diabetes prevalence among those aged 18-44 years. Within real data analyses, we externally validate city- and neighborhood-level EHR-based estimates to gold-standard estimates from a local health survey. Within data simulations, we probe the extent to which residual biases remain when selection into the EHR sample is non-ignorable. Results: Within the real data analyses, these methods reduced the impact of selection biases in the citywide prevalence estimate compared to gold standard. Residual biases remained at the neighborhood-level, where prevalence tended to be overestimated, especially in neighborhoods where a higher proportion of residents were captured in the sample. Simulation results demonstrated these methods may be sufficient, except when selection into the EHR is non-ignorable, depending on unmeasured factors or on diabetes status. Conclusions: While EHRs offer potential to innovate on chronic disease surveillance, care is needed when estimating prevalence for small geographies or when selection is non-ignorable.

Indexed as

diabetes mellituselectronic health recordsprevalenceselection biassurveillance

Identifiers

PMID39568629
PMCPMC11578099

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.