ArticleBMC medical research methodology2026
Mitigating bias in the analysis and inferences from using longitudinal EHR data in disease outcomes research.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 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
Abstract
backgroundThe electronic health record (EHR) provides an opportunity for extracting a wealth of up-to-date real-world longitudinal data. Although the main limitations of using EHR data have been well-recognized and well-described, under-recognized factors may threaten the reliability of inferences made regarding the impact of EHR variables on chronic disease outcomes. A problem not well-recognized is the impact of routinely acquired variables that are documented with every patient encounter regardless of the reason for the encounter such as vital signs, height, and body weight.
methodsWe utilized a landmark approach to identify occurrence of 10 cardiovascular-related disease outcomes after a 5-year observation period during which all body weights recorded in the EHR were used in multivariate cox regression modeling to identify the strongest of 9 weight-based predictor variables for each of the 10 disease outcomes.
resultsWe found that the number of recorded weights, as an independent variable, was the strongest predictor for all 10 cardiovascular-related disease outcomes when compared to all other weight-based variables (lowest weight, highest weight, average weight, last weight, absolute weight change, maximum weight change, weight fluctuation, and weight cycling) as well as BMI. The findings demonstrate the importance of recognizing and accounting for the number of times a more frequently measured clinical variable, such as body weight, is recorded as it is critical to determine the true impact of other similar variables on disease outcomes when conducting longitudinal analysis of EHR data.
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.