33 research outputs found

    Electronic health record data quality assessment and tools: A systematic review

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: We extended a 2013 literature review on electronic health record (EHR) data quality assessment approaches and tools to determine recent improvements or changes in EHR data quality assessment methodologies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We completed a systematic review of PubMed articles from 2013 to April 2023 that discussed the quality assessment of EHR data. We screened and reviewed papers for the dimensions and methods defined in the original 2013 manuscript. We categorized papers as data quality outcomes of interest, tools, or opinion pieces. We abstracted and defined additional themes and methods though an iterative review process. RESULTS: We included 103 papers in the review, of which 73 were data quality outcomes of interest papers, 22 were tools, and 8 were opinion pieces. The most common dimension of data quality assessed was completeness, followed by correctness, concordance, plausibility, and currency. We abstracted conformance and bias as 2 additional dimensions of data quality and structural agreement as an additional methodology. DISCUSSION: There has been an increase in EHR data quality assessment publications since the original 2013 review. Consistent dimensions of EHR data quality continue to be assessed across applications. Despite consistent patterns of assessment, there still does not exist a standard approach for assessing EHR data quality. CONCLUSION: Guidelines are needed for EHR data quality assessment to improve the efficiency, transparency, comparability, and interoperability of data quality assessment. These guidelines must be both scalable and flexible. Automation could be helpful in generalizing this process

    Issues With Variability in Electronic Health Record Data About Race and Ethnicity: Descriptive Analysis of the National COVID Cohort Collaborative Data Enclave

    Get PDF
    Background:The adverse impact of COVID-19 on marginalized and under-resourced communities of color has highlighted the need for accurate, comprehensive race and ethnicity data. However, a significant technical challenge related to integrating race and ethnicity data in large, consolidated databases is the lack of consistency in how data about race and ethnicity are collected and structured by health care organizations. Objective:This study aims to evaluate and describe variations in how health care systems collect and report information about the race and ethnicity of their patients and to assess how well these data are integrated when aggregated into a large clinical database. Methods:At the time of our analysis, the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) Data Enclave contained records from 6.5 million patients contributed by 56 health care institutions. We quantified the variability in the harmonized race and ethnicity data in the N3C Data Enclave by analyzing the conformance to health care standards for such data. We conducted a descriptive analysis by comparing the harmonized data available for research purposes in the database to the original source data contributed by health care institutions. To make the comparison, we tabulated the original source codes, enumerating how many patients had been reported with each encoded value and how many distinct ways each category was reported. The nonconforming data were also cross tabulated by 3 factors: patient ethnicity, the number of data partners using each code, and which data models utilized those particular encodings. For the nonconforming data, we used an inductive approach to sort the source encodings into categories. For example, values such as “Declined” were grouped with “Refused,” and “Multiple Race” was grouped with “Two or more races” and “Multiracial.” Results:“No matching concept” was the second largest harmonized concept used by the N3C to describe the race of patients in their database. In addition, 20.7% of the race data did not conform to the standard; the largest category was data that were missing. Hispanic or Latino patients were overrepresented in the nonconforming racial data, and data from American Indian or Alaska Native patients were obscured. Although only a small proportion of the source data had not been mapped to the correct concepts (0.6%), Black or African American and Hispanic/Latino patients were overrepresented in this category. Conclusions:Differences in how race and ethnicity data are conceptualized and encoded by health care institutions can affect the quality of the data in aggregated clinical databases. The impact of data quality issues in the N3C Data Enclave was not equal across all races and ethnicities, which has the potential to introduce bias in analyses and conclusions drawn from these data. Transparency about how data have been transformed can help users make accurate analyses and inferences and eventually better guide clinical care and public policy

    Issues with variability in electronic health record data about race and ethnicity: Descriptive analysis of the National COVID Cohort Collaborative Data Enclave

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: The adverse impact of COVID-19 on marginalized and under-resourced communities of color has highlighted the need for accurate, comprehensive race and ethnicity data. However, a significant technical challenge related to integrating race and ethnicity data in large, consolidated databases is the lack of consistency in how data about race and ethnicity are collected and structured by health care organizations. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate and describe variations in how health care systems collect and report information about the race and ethnicity of their patients and to assess how well these data are integrated when aggregated into a large clinical database. METHODS: At the time of our analysis, the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) Data Enclave contained records from 6.5 million patients contributed by 56 health care institutions. We quantified the variability in the harmonized race and ethnicity data in the N3C Data Enclave by analyzing the conformance to health care standards for such data. We conducted a descriptive analysis by comparing the harmonized data available for research purposes in the database to the original source data contributed by health care institutions. To make the comparison, we tabulated the original source codes, enumerating how many patients had been reported with each encoded value and how many distinct ways each category was reported. The nonconforming data were also cross tabulated by 3 factors: patient ethnicity, the number of data partners using each code, and which data models utilized those particular encodings. For the nonconforming data, we used an inductive approach to sort the source encodings into categories. For example, values such as Declined were grouped with Refused, and Multiple Race was grouped with Two or more races and Multiracial. RESULTS: No matching concept was the second largest harmonized concept used by the N3C to describe the race of patients in their database. In addition, 20.7% of the race data did not conform to the standard; the largest category was data that were missing. Hispanic or Latino patients were overrepresented in the nonconforming racial data, and data from American Indian or Alaska Native patients were obscured. Although only a small proportion of the source data had not been mapped to the correct concepts (0.6%), Black or African American and Hispanic/Latino patients were overrepresented in this category. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in how race and ethnicity data are conceptualized and encoded by health care institutions can affect the quality of the data in aggregated clinical databases. The impact of data quality issues in the N3C Data Enclave was not equal across all races and ethnicities, which has the potential to introduce bias in analyses and conclusions drawn from these data. Transparency about how data have been transformed can help users make accurate analyses and inferences and eventually better guide clinical care and public policy

    Identification of Conserved and HLA Promiscuous DENV3 T-Cell Epitopes

    Get PDF
    Anti-dengue T-cell responses have been implicated in both protection and immunopathology. However, most of the T-cell studies for dengue include few epitopes, with limited knowledge of their inter-serotype variation and the breadth of their human leukocyte antigen (HLA) affinity. In order to expand our knowledge of HLA-restricted dengue epitopes, we screened T-cell responses against 477 overlapping peptides derived from structural and non-structural proteins of the dengue virus serotype 3 (DENV3) by use of HLA class I and II transgenic mice (TgM): A2, A24, B7, DR2, DR3 and DR4. TgM were inoculated with peptides pools and the T-cell immunogenic peptides were identified by ELISPOT. Nine HLA class I and 97 HLA class II novel DENV3 epitopes were identified based on immunogenicity in TgM and their HLA affinity was further confirmed by binding assays analysis. A subset of these epitopes activated memory T-cells from DENV3 immune volunteers and was also capable of priming naïve T-cells, ex vivo, from dengue IgG negative individuals. Analysis of inter- and intra-serotype variation of such an epitope (A02-restricted) allowed us to identify altered peptide ligands not only in DENV3 but also in other DENV serotypes. These studies also characterized the HLA promiscuity of 23 HLA class II epitopes bearing highly conserved sequences, six of which could bind to more than 10 different HLA molecules representing a large percentage of the global population. These epitope data are invaluable to investigate the role of T-cells in dengue immunity/pathogenesis and vaccine design. © 2013 Nascimento et al
    corecore