Cargando…

Assessing the validity of tuberculosis surveillance data in California

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) convened a workgroup to revise the tuberculosis (TB) case report in the United States of America (U.S.). The group proposed substantial revisions. Study objectives were to systematically assess the validity and completeness of reported...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sprinson, Joan E, Lawton, Elizabeth S, Porco, Travis C, Flood, Jennifer M, Westenhouse, Janice L
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1617097/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16930492
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-6-217
_version_ 1782130503173799936
author Sprinson, Joan E
Lawton, Elizabeth S
Porco, Travis C
Flood, Jennifer M
Westenhouse, Janice L
author_facet Sprinson, Joan E
Lawton, Elizabeth S
Porco, Travis C
Flood, Jennifer M
Westenhouse, Janice L
author_sort Sprinson, Joan E
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) convened a workgroup to revise the tuberculosis (TB) case report in the United States of America (U.S.). The group proposed substantial revisions. Study objectives were to systematically assess the validity and completeness of reported TB case surveillance data in California and to inform TB case report revision process. METHODS: A sample of 594 cases was retrospectively selected from the cohort of all TB cases reported during 6/1/96-5/31/97 to the State TB Registry. Cases, stratified by treatment outcome, were randomly sampled within each outcome category. Data for 53 variables were abstracted from each case's public health medical record and compared to data recorded on the TB case report. Using the medical record as the "gold standard," estimates were developed for 1) concordance, sensitivity, and positive predictive value of reported data for categorical variables; 2) the absolute mean difference between the two information source for date variables; and 3) the completeness of data on the case report and in medical record. RESULTS: At least 90% of the values for 35 (79.5%) categorical variables submitted on the TB case report form were identical to values in the medical record. Concordance between data on the case report and medical record was lower for the remaining nine (20.5%) categorical variables: status of abnormal chest x-ray (46.8%); directly observed therapy (48.6%); smear result for tissue or body fluid other than sputum (49.2%); type(s) of tissue or body fluid for smears and cultures other than sputum (76.4% and 73.9% respectively); provider type (73.4%); occupation (84.4%); sputum culture conversion (85.4%); and sputum smear result (89.6%). Case report data were more complete than data in the medical record; 2.9% versus 9.8% of data were missing/unknown, respectively. CONCLUSION: For most variables examined on the TB case report, data validity was excellent, indicating a robust surveillance system. However, lower data quality was noted for a small number of variables primarily impacting treatment adherence, including assessment and planning; advocacy; allocation and garnering of resources; and research. The study provides compelling evidence supporting the CDC workgroup's proposed revisions to the TB case report.
format Text
id pubmed-1617097
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2006
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-16170972006-10-20 Assessing the validity of tuberculosis surveillance data in California Sprinson, Joan E Lawton, Elizabeth S Porco, Travis C Flood, Jennifer M Westenhouse, Janice L BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) convened a workgroup to revise the tuberculosis (TB) case report in the United States of America (U.S.). The group proposed substantial revisions. Study objectives were to systematically assess the validity and completeness of reported TB case surveillance data in California and to inform TB case report revision process. METHODS: A sample of 594 cases was retrospectively selected from the cohort of all TB cases reported during 6/1/96-5/31/97 to the State TB Registry. Cases, stratified by treatment outcome, were randomly sampled within each outcome category. Data for 53 variables were abstracted from each case's public health medical record and compared to data recorded on the TB case report. Using the medical record as the "gold standard," estimates were developed for 1) concordance, sensitivity, and positive predictive value of reported data for categorical variables; 2) the absolute mean difference between the two information source for date variables; and 3) the completeness of data on the case report and in medical record. RESULTS: At least 90% of the values for 35 (79.5%) categorical variables submitted on the TB case report form were identical to values in the medical record. Concordance between data on the case report and medical record was lower for the remaining nine (20.5%) categorical variables: status of abnormal chest x-ray (46.8%); directly observed therapy (48.6%); smear result for tissue or body fluid other than sputum (49.2%); type(s) of tissue or body fluid for smears and cultures other than sputum (76.4% and 73.9% respectively); provider type (73.4%); occupation (84.4%); sputum culture conversion (85.4%); and sputum smear result (89.6%). Case report data were more complete than data in the medical record; 2.9% versus 9.8% of data were missing/unknown, respectively. CONCLUSION: For most variables examined on the TB case report, data validity was excellent, indicating a robust surveillance system. However, lower data quality was noted for a small number of variables primarily impacting treatment adherence, including assessment and planning; advocacy; allocation and garnering of resources; and research. The study provides compelling evidence supporting the CDC workgroup's proposed revisions to the TB case report. BioMed Central 2006-08-25 /pmc/articles/PMC1617097/ /pubmed/16930492 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-6-217 Text en Copyright © 2006 Sprinson et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Sprinson, Joan E
Lawton, Elizabeth S
Porco, Travis C
Flood, Jennifer M
Westenhouse, Janice L
Assessing the validity of tuberculosis surveillance data in California
title Assessing the validity of tuberculosis surveillance data in California
title_full Assessing the validity of tuberculosis surveillance data in California
title_fullStr Assessing the validity of tuberculosis surveillance data in California
title_full_unstemmed Assessing the validity of tuberculosis surveillance data in California
title_short Assessing the validity of tuberculosis surveillance data in California
title_sort assessing the validity of tuberculosis surveillance data in california
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1617097/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16930492
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-6-217
work_keys_str_mv AT sprinsonjoane assessingthevalidityoftuberculosissurveillancedataincalifornia
AT lawtonelizabeths assessingthevalidityoftuberculosissurveillancedataincalifornia
AT porcotravisc assessingthevalidityoftuberculosissurveillancedataincalifornia
AT floodjenniferm assessingthevalidityoftuberculosissurveillancedataincalifornia
AT westenhousejanicel assessingthevalidityoftuberculosissurveillancedataincalifornia