Cargando…

Use of electronic medical records (EMR) for oncology outcomes research: assessing the comparability of EMR information to patient registry and health claims data

Electronic medical records (EMRs) are used increasingly for research in clinical oncology, epidemiology, and comparative effectiveness research (CER). OBJECTIVE: To assess the utility of using EMR data in population-based cancer research by comparing a database of EMRs from community oncology clinic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lau, Edmund C, Mowat, Fionna S, Kelsh, Michael A, Legg, Jason C, Engel-Nitz, Nicole M, Watson, Heather N, Collins, Helen L, Nordyke, Robert J, Whyte, Joanna L
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3224632/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22135501
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S23690
_version_ 1782217419335401472
author Lau, Edmund C
Mowat, Fionna S
Kelsh, Michael A
Legg, Jason C
Engel-Nitz, Nicole M
Watson, Heather N
Collins, Helen L
Nordyke, Robert J
Whyte, Joanna L
author_facet Lau, Edmund C
Mowat, Fionna S
Kelsh, Michael A
Legg, Jason C
Engel-Nitz, Nicole M
Watson, Heather N
Collins, Helen L
Nordyke, Robert J
Whyte, Joanna L
author_sort Lau, Edmund C
collection PubMed
description Electronic medical records (EMRs) are used increasingly for research in clinical oncology, epidemiology, and comparative effectiveness research (CER). OBJECTIVE: To assess the utility of using EMR data in population-based cancer research by comparing a database of EMRs from community oncology clinics against Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) cancer registry data and two claims databases (Medicare and commercial claims). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Demographic, clinical, and treatment patterns in the EMR, SEER, Medicare, and commercial claims data were compared using six tumor sites: breast, lung/bronchus, head/neck, colorectal, prostate, and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL). We identified various challenges in data standardization and selection of appropriate statistical procedures. We describe the patient and clinic inclusion criteria, treatment definitions, and consideration of the administrative and clinical purposes of the EMR, registry, and claims data to address these challenges. RESULTS: Sex and 10-year age distributions of patient populations for each tumor site were generally similar across the data sets. We observed several differences in racial composition and treatment patterns, and modest differences in distribution of tumor site. CONCLUSION: Our experience with an oncology EMR database identified several factors that must be considered when using EMRs for research purposes or generalizing results to the US cancer population. These factors were related primarily to evaluation of treatment patterns, including evaluation of stage, geographic location, race, and specialization of the medical facilities. While many specialty EMRs may not provide the breadth of data on medical care, as found in comprehensive claims databases and EMR systems, they can provide detailed clinical data not found in claims that are extremely important in conducting epidemiologic and outcomes research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3224632
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32246322011-12-01 Use of electronic medical records (EMR) for oncology outcomes research: assessing the comparability of EMR information to patient registry and health claims data Lau, Edmund C Mowat, Fionna S Kelsh, Michael A Legg, Jason C Engel-Nitz, Nicole M Watson, Heather N Collins, Helen L Nordyke, Robert J Whyte, Joanna L Clin Epidemiol Original Research Electronic medical records (EMRs) are used increasingly for research in clinical oncology, epidemiology, and comparative effectiveness research (CER). OBJECTIVE: To assess the utility of using EMR data in population-based cancer research by comparing a database of EMRs from community oncology clinics against Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) cancer registry data and two claims databases (Medicare and commercial claims). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Demographic, clinical, and treatment patterns in the EMR, SEER, Medicare, and commercial claims data were compared using six tumor sites: breast, lung/bronchus, head/neck, colorectal, prostate, and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL). We identified various challenges in data standardization and selection of appropriate statistical procedures. We describe the patient and clinic inclusion criteria, treatment definitions, and consideration of the administrative and clinical purposes of the EMR, registry, and claims data to address these challenges. RESULTS: Sex and 10-year age distributions of patient populations for each tumor site were generally similar across the data sets. We observed several differences in racial composition and treatment patterns, and modest differences in distribution of tumor site. CONCLUSION: Our experience with an oncology EMR database identified several factors that must be considered when using EMRs for research purposes or generalizing results to the US cancer population. These factors were related primarily to evaluation of treatment patterns, including evaluation of stage, geographic location, race, and specialization of the medical facilities. While many specialty EMRs may not provide the breadth of data on medical care, as found in comprehensive claims databases and EMR systems, they can provide detailed clinical data not found in claims that are extremely important in conducting epidemiologic and outcomes research. Dove Medical Press 2011-10-11 /pmc/articles/PMC3224632/ /pubmed/22135501 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S23690 Text en © 2011 Lau et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd. This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Lau, Edmund C
Mowat, Fionna S
Kelsh, Michael A
Legg, Jason C
Engel-Nitz, Nicole M
Watson, Heather N
Collins, Helen L
Nordyke, Robert J
Whyte, Joanna L
Use of electronic medical records (EMR) for oncology outcomes research: assessing the comparability of EMR information to patient registry and health claims data
title Use of electronic medical records (EMR) for oncology outcomes research: assessing the comparability of EMR information to patient registry and health claims data
title_full Use of electronic medical records (EMR) for oncology outcomes research: assessing the comparability of EMR information to patient registry and health claims data
title_fullStr Use of electronic medical records (EMR) for oncology outcomes research: assessing the comparability of EMR information to patient registry and health claims data
title_full_unstemmed Use of electronic medical records (EMR) for oncology outcomes research: assessing the comparability of EMR information to patient registry and health claims data
title_short Use of electronic medical records (EMR) for oncology outcomes research: assessing the comparability of EMR information to patient registry and health claims data
title_sort use of electronic medical records (emr) for oncology outcomes research: assessing the comparability of emr information to patient registry and health claims data
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3224632/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22135501
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S23690
work_keys_str_mv AT lauedmundc useofelectronicmedicalrecordsemrforoncologyoutcomesresearchassessingthecomparabilityofemrinformationtopatientregistryandhealthclaimsdata
AT mowatfionnas useofelectronicmedicalrecordsemrforoncologyoutcomesresearchassessingthecomparabilityofemrinformationtopatientregistryandhealthclaimsdata
AT kelshmichaela useofelectronicmedicalrecordsemrforoncologyoutcomesresearchassessingthecomparabilityofemrinformationtopatientregistryandhealthclaimsdata
AT leggjasonc useofelectronicmedicalrecordsemrforoncologyoutcomesresearchassessingthecomparabilityofemrinformationtopatientregistryandhealthclaimsdata
AT engelnitznicolem useofelectronicmedicalrecordsemrforoncologyoutcomesresearchassessingthecomparabilityofemrinformationtopatientregistryandhealthclaimsdata
AT watsonheathern useofelectronicmedicalrecordsemrforoncologyoutcomesresearchassessingthecomparabilityofemrinformationtopatientregistryandhealthclaimsdata
AT collinshelenl useofelectronicmedicalrecordsemrforoncologyoutcomesresearchassessingthecomparabilityofemrinformationtopatientregistryandhealthclaimsdata
AT nordykerobertj useofelectronicmedicalrecordsemrforoncologyoutcomesresearchassessingthecomparabilityofemrinformationtopatientregistryandhealthclaimsdata
AT whytejoannal useofelectronicmedicalrecordsemrforoncologyoutcomesresearchassessingthecomparabilityofemrinformationtopatientregistryandhealthclaimsdata