Cargando…
Evaluating the accuracy of data extracted from electronic health records into MedicineInsight, a national Australian general practice database
INTRODUCTION: MedicineInsight is a database containing de-identified electronic health records (EHRs) from over 700 Australian general practices. Previous research validated algorithms used to derive medical condition flags in MedicineInsight, but the accuracy of data fields following EHR extraction...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Swansea University
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10464870/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37650032 http://dx.doi.org/10.23889/ijpds.v7i1.1713 |
_version_ | 1785098559112085504 |
---|---|
author | Daniels, Benjamin Havard, Alys Myton, Rimma Lee, Cynthia Chidwick, Kendal |
author_facet | Daniels, Benjamin Havard, Alys Myton, Rimma Lee, Cynthia Chidwick, Kendal |
author_sort | Daniels, Benjamin |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: MedicineInsight is a database containing de-identified electronic health records (EHRs) from over 700 Australian general practices. Previous research validated algorithms used to derive medical condition flags in MedicineInsight, but the accuracy of data fields following EHR extractions from clinical practices and data warehouse transformation processes have not been formally validated. OBJECTIVES: To examine the accuracy of the extraction and transformation of EHR fields for selected demographics, observations, diagnoses, prescriptions, and tests into MedicineInsight. METHODS: We benchmarked MedicineInsight values against those recorded in original EHRs. Forty-six general practices contributing data to MedicineInsight met our eligibility criteria, eight were randomly selected, and four agreed to participate. We randomly selected 200 patients >18 years of age within each participating practice from MedicineInsight. Trained staff reviewed the original EHRs for the selected patients and recorded data from the relevant fields. We calculated the percentage of agreement (POA) between MedicineInsight and EHR data for all fields; Cohen’s Kappa for categorical and intra-class correlation (ICC) for continuous measures; and sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV/NPV) for diagnoses. RESULTS: A total of 796 patients were included in our analysis. All demographic characteristics, observations, diagnoses, prescriptions and random pathology test results had excellent (>90%) POA, Kappa, and ICC. POA for most recent pathology/imaging test was moderate (81%, [95% CI: 78% to 84%]). Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were excellent (>90%) for all but one of the examined diagnoses which had a poor PPV. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our study shows good agreement between the majority of MedicineInsight data and those from original EHRs, suggesting MedicineInsight data extraction and warehousing procedures accurately conserve the data in these key fields. Discrepancies between test data may have arisen due to how data from pathology, radiology and other imaging providers are stored in EHRs and MedicineInsight and this requires further investigation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10464870 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Swansea University |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-104648702023-08-30 Evaluating the accuracy of data extracted from electronic health records into MedicineInsight, a national Australian general practice database Daniels, Benjamin Havard, Alys Myton, Rimma Lee, Cynthia Chidwick, Kendal Int J Popul Data Sci Population Data Science INTRODUCTION: MedicineInsight is a database containing de-identified electronic health records (EHRs) from over 700 Australian general practices. Previous research validated algorithms used to derive medical condition flags in MedicineInsight, but the accuracy of data fields following EHR extractions from clinical practices and data warehouse transformation processes have not been formally validated. OBJECTIVES: To examine the accuracy of the extraction and transformation of EHR fields for selected demographics, observations, diagnoses, prescriptions, and tests into MedicineInsight. METHODS: We benchmarked MedicineInsight values against those recorded in original EHRs. Forty-six general practices contributing data to MedicineInsight met our eligibility criteria, eight were randomly selected, and four agreed to participate. We randomly selected 200 patients >18 years of age within each participating practice from MedicineInsight. Trained staff reviewed the original EHRs for the selected patients and recorded data from the relevant fields. We calculated the percentage of agreement (POA) between MedicineInsight and EHR data for all fields; Cohen’s Kappa for categorical and intra-class correlation (ICC) for continuous measures; and sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV/NPV) for diagnoses. RESULTS: A total of 796 patients were included in our analysis. All demographic characteristics, observations, diagnoses, prescriptions and random pathology test results had excellent (>90%) POA, Kappa, and ICC. POA for most recent pathology/imaging test was moderate (81%, [95% CI: 78% to 84%]). Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were excellent (>90%) for all but one of the examined diagnoses which had a poor PPV. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our study shows good agreement between the majority of MedicineInsight data and those from original EHRs, suggesting MedicineInsight data extraction and warehousing procedures accurately conserve the data in these key fields. Discrepancies between test data may have arisen due to how data from pathology, radiology and other imaging providers are stored in EHRs and MedicineInsight and this requires further investigation. Swansea University 2022-06-29 /pmc/articles/PMC10464870/ /pubmed/37650032 http://dx.doi.org/10.23889/ijpds.v7i1.1713 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. |
spellingShingle | Population Data Science Daniels, Benjamin Havard, Alys Myton, Rimma Lee, Cynthia Chidwick, Kendal Evaluating the accuracy of data extracted from electronic health records into MedicineInsight, a national Australian general practice database |
title | Evaluating the accuracy of data extracted from electronic health records into MedicineInsight, a national Australian general practice database |
title_full | Evaluating the accuracy of data extracted from electronic health records into MedicineInsight, a national Australian general practice database |
title_fullStr | Evaluating the accuracy of data extracted from electronic health records into MedicineInsight, a national Australian general practice database |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating the accuracy of data extracted from electronic health records into MedicineInsight, a national Australian general practice database |
title_short | Evaluating the accuracy of data extracted from electronic health records into MedicineInsight, a national Australian general practice database |
title_sort | evaluating the accuracy of data extracted from electronic health records into medicineinsight, a national australian general practice database |
topic | Population Data Science |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10464870/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37650032 http://dx.doi.org/10.23889/ijpds.v7i1.1713 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT danielsbenjamin evaluatingtheaccuracyofdataextractedfromelectronichealthrecordsintomedicineinsightanationalaustraliangeneralpracticedatabase AT havardalys evaluatingtheaccuracyofdataextractedfromelectronichealthrecordsintomedicineinsightanationalaustraliangeneralpracticedatabase AT mytonrimma evaluatingtheaccuracyofdataextractedfromelectronichealthrecordsintomedicineinsightanationalaustraliangeneralpracticedatabase AT leecynthia evaluatingtheaccuracyofdataextractedfromelectronichealthrecordsintomedicineinsightanationalaustraliangeneralpracticedatabase AT chidwickkendal evaluatingtheaccuracyofdataextractedfromelectronichealthrecordsintomedicineinsightanationalaustraliangeneralpracticedatabase |