ArticleJMIR medical informatics2025
Process for Quality Management of Electronic Medical Records-Based Data: Case Study Using Real Colorectal Cancer Data.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2025. 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: As data-driven medical research advances, vast amounts of medical data are being collected, giving researchers access to important information. However, issues such as heterogeneity, complexity, and incompleteness of datasets limit their practical use. Errors and missing data negatively affect artificial intelligence-based predictive models, undermining the reliability of clinical decision-making. Thus, it is important to develop a quality management process (QMP) for clinical data. Objective: This study aimed to develop a rules-based QMP to address errors and impute missing values in real-world data, establishing high-quality data for clinical research. Methods: We used clinical data from 6491 patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) collected at Gachon University Gil Medical Center between 2010 and 2022, leveraging the clinical library established within the Korea Clinical Data Use Network for Research Excellence. First, we conducted a literature review on the prognostic prediction of CRC to assess whether the data met our research purposes, comparing selected variables with real-world data. A labeling process was then implemented to extract key variables, which facilitated the creation of an automatic staging library. This library, combined with a rule-based process, allowed for systematic analysis and evaluation. Results: Theoretically, the tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) stage was identified as an important prognostic factor for CRC, but it was not selected through feature selection in real-world data. After applying the QMP, rates of missing data were reduced from 75.3% to 35.7% for TNM and from 24.3% to 18.5% for surveillance, epidemiology, and end results across 6491 cases, confirming the system's effectiveness. Variable importance analysis through feature selection revealed that TNM stage and detailed code variables, which were previously unselected, were included in the improved model. Conclusions: In sum, we developed a rules-based QMP to address errors and impute missing values in Korea Clinical Data Use Network for Research Excellence data, enhancing data quality. The applicability of the process to real-world datasets highlights its potential for broader use in clinical studies and cancer research.
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.