ArticleBMJ health & care informatics2026
Routine data are not 'dirty' data: how to approach using routine data for research.
Article in BMJ health & care informatics, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rise of electronic patient records has led to an abundance of routine healthcare data, and the development of NHS Secure Data Environments (SDEs) is transforming their potential for research. However, routine data differ fundamentally from research data; they are generated to support care processes rather than answer predefined research questions. This creates challenges when they are analysed without understanding the context in which they were produced.Using real examples from practice, this paper illustrates the variety of ways routine data can be shaped and how this leads to misinterpretation if treated as merely 'dirty' research data. These examples underpin practical strategies for researchers, including analysis at or by source and working closely with local data providers to understand how a dataset was created.We argue that SDEs must foster strong links between data users and creators to preserve data provenance and support accurate interpretation. By approaching routine data as meaningful records of healthcare processes-rather than flawed research datasets-researchers can fully realise their potential to drive healthcare improvement.
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.