ArticleStatistics in medicine2025
False Discovery Estimation in Record Linkage.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- False Discovery Estimation in Record Linkage.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Integrating data from multiple sources expands research opportunities at low cost. However, due to different data collection processes and privacy constraints, unique identifiers are unavailable. Record linkage (RL) algorithms address this by probabilistically linking records based on partially identifying variables. Since these variables lack the strength to perfectly combine information, RL procedures yield an imperfect set of linked records. Therefore, assessing the false discovery proportion (FDP) in RL is crucial for ensuring the reliability of subsequent analyses. In this paper, we introduce a novel method for estimating the FDP in RL for two overlapping data sets. We synthesize data from their estimated empirical distribution and use it along with real data in the linkage process. Since synthetic records cannot form links with real entities, they provide a means to estimate the amount of falsely linked pairs. Notably, this method applies to all RL techniques and across diverse settings where links and non-links have similar distributions-typical in complex tasks with poorly discriminative linking variables and multiple records sharing similar information while representing different entities. By identifying the FDP in RL and selecting suitable model parameters, our approach enables to assess and improve the reliability of linked data. We evaluate its performance using established RL algorithms and benchmark data applications before deploying it to link siblings from the Netherlands Perinatal Registry, where the reliability of previous RL applications has never been confirmed. Through this application, we highlight the importance of accounting for linkage errors when studying mother-child dynamics in healthcare records.
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.