ArticleJournal of registry management2024
Enhancing Data Quality in a Statewide Birth Defects Registry: Insights from an Ongoing Quality Improvement Initiative.
Article in Journal of registry management, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Since 1999, the Texas Birth Defects Registry (TBDR) has conducted active statewide surveillance of congenital anomalies in Texas. The TBDR has established quality assurance procedures and protocols. With the aim of supplementing these existing procedures with a new approach to proactively identify operational issues impacting data quality, we sought to implement a survey to identify procedural and operational challenges and develop strategies to mitigate the effects of practices (eg, changes in reporting practices at hospitals), external events (eg, pandemics), and other issues that may impact data quality. Methods: An open-text, anonymous survey was developed and distributed to TBDR staff. The survey elicited responses from staff related to TBDR operations, partnerships, and communication with external health care facilities. In years 2 and 3, the survey was abbreviated from 9 to 3 questions. Results: Completion rates were 45%, 74%, and 49% in years 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Thematic analysis across all 3 years identified 7 primary themes: (1) data timeliness, (2) data quality improvements, (3) workflow optimization, (4) fundamental training needs, (5) specialized or technical training needs, (6) system challenges, and (7) internal communication and coordination. Conclusions: This project provides a proof-of-concept that active surveillance birth defects registries can collect information on data quality-related staff experiences in a real-time, systematic manner and implement short- and long-term strategies to address data quality. The survey results prompted internal strategic planning, additional employee training initiatives, and data system enhancements. Additional work is needed to monitor the long-term improvements resulting from these strategic actions. The data quality survey results and implemented strategies may be useful to other surveillance programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39897606PMC11781287What 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.