Cargando…

Factors Affecting Accuracy of Data Abstracted from Medical Records

OBJECTIVE: Medical record abstraction (MRA) is often cited as a significant source of error in research data, yet MRA methodology has rarely been the subject of investigation. Lack of a common framework has hindered application of the extant literature in practice, and, until now, there were no evid...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zozus, Meredith N., Pieper, Carl, Johnson, Constance M., Johnson, Todd R., Franklin, Amy, Smith, Jack, Zhang, Jiajie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4615628/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26484762
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138649
_version_ 1782396498796871680
author Zozus, Meredith N.
Pieper, Carl
Johnson, Constance M.
Johnson, Todd R.
Franklin, Amy
Smith, Jack
Zhang, Jiajie
author_facet Zozus, Meredith N.
Pieper, Carl
Johnson, Constance M.
Johnson, Todd R.
Franklin, Amy
Smith, Jack
Zhang, Jiajie
author_sort Zozus, Meredith N.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Medical record abstraction (MRA) is often cited as a significant source of error in research data, yet MRA methodology has rarely been the subject of investigation. Lack of a common framework has hindered application of the extant literature in practice, and, until now, there were no evidence-based guidelines for ensuring data quality in MRA. We aimed to identify the factors affecting the accuracy of data abstracted from medical records and to generate a framework for data quality assurance and control in MRA. METHODS: Candidate factors were identified from published reports of MRA. Content validity of the top candidate factors was assessed via a four-round two-group Delphi process with expert abstractors with experience in clinical research, registries, and quality improvement. The resulting coded factors were categorized into a control theory-based framework of MRA. Coverage of the framework was evaluated using the recent published literature. RESULTS: Analysis of the identified articles yielded 292 unique factors that affect the accuracy of abstracted data. Delphi processes overall refuted three of the top factors identified from the literature based on importance and five based on reliability (six total factors refuted). Four new factors were identified by the Delphi. The generated framework demonstrated comprehensive coverage. Significant underreporting of MRA methodology in recent studies was discovered. CONCLUSION: The framework generated from this research provides a guide for planning data quality assurance and control for studies using MRA. The large number and variability of factors indicate that while prospective quality assurance likely increases the accuracy of abstracted data, monitoring the accuracy during the abstraction process is also required. Recent studies reporting research results based on MRA rarely reported data quality assurance or control measures, and even less frequently reported data quality metrics with research results. Given the demonstrated variability, these methods and measures should be reported with research results.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4615628
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46156282015-10-29 Factors Affecting Accuracy of Data Abstracted from Medical Records Zozus, Meredith N. Pieper, Carl Johnson, Constance M. Johnson, Todd R. Franklin, Amy Smith, Jack Zhang, Jiajie PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVE: Medical record abstraction (MRA) is often cited as a significant source of error in research data, yet MRA methodology has rarely been the subject of investigation. Lack of a common framework has hindered application of the extant literature in practice, and, until now, there were no evidence-based guidelines for ensuring data quality in MRA. We aimed to identify the factors affecting the accuracy of data abstracted from medical records and to generate a framework for data quality assurance and control in MRA. METHODS: Candidate factors were identified from published reports of MRA. Content validity of the top candidate factors was assessed via a four-round two-group Delphi process with expert abstractors with experience in clinical research, registries, and quality improvement. The resulting coded factors were categorized into a control theory-based framework of MRA. Coverage of the framework was evaluated using the recent published literature. RESULTS: Analysis of the identified articles yielded 292 unique factors that affect the accuracy of abstracted data. Delphi processes overall refuted three of the top factors identified from the literature based on importance and five based on reliability (six total factors refuted). Four new factors were identified by the Delphi. The generated framework demonstrated comprehensive coverage. Significant underreporting of MRA methodology in recent studies was discovered. CONCLUSION: The framework generated from this research provides a guide for planning data quality assurance and control for studies using MRA. The large number and variability of factors indicate that while prospective quality assurance likely increases the accuracy of abstracted data, monitoring the accuracy during the abstraction process is also required. Recent studies reporting research results based on MRA rarely reported data quality assurance or control measures, and even less frequently reported data quality metrics with research results. Given the demonstrated variability, these methods and measures should be reported with research results. Public Library of Science 2015-10-20 /pmc/articles/PMC4615628/ /pubmed/26484762 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138649 Text en © 2015 Zozus et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Zozus, Meredith N.
Pieper, Carl
Johnson, Constance M.
Johnson, Todd R.
Franklin, Amy
Smith, Jack
Zhang, Jiajie
Factors Affecting Accuracy of Data Abstracted from Medical Records
title Factors Affecting Accuracy of Data Abstracted from Medical Records
title_full Factors Affecting Accuracy of Data Abstracted from Medical Records
title_fullStr Factors Affecting Accuracy of Data Abstracted from Medical Records
title_full_unstemmed Factors Affecting Accuracy of Data Abstracted from Medical Records
title_short Factors Affecting Accuracy of Data Abstracted from Medical Records
title_sort factors affecting accuracy of data abstracted from medical records
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4615628/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26484762
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138649
work_keys_str_mv AT zozusmeredithn factorsaffectingaccuracyofdataabstractedfrommedicalrecords
AT piepercarl factorsaffectingaccuracyofdataabstractedfrommedicalrecords
AT johnsonconstancem factorsaffectingaccuracyofdataabstractedfrommedicalrecords
AT johnsontoddr factorsaffectingaccuracyofdataabstractedfrommedicalrecords
AT franklinamy factorsaffectingaccuracyofdataabstractedfrommedicalrecords
AT smithjack factorsaffectingaccuracyofdataabstractedfrommedicalrecords
AT zhangjiajie factorsaffectingaccuracyofdataabstractedfrommedicalrecords