Cargando…

Validating a transnational fracture treatment registry using a standardized method

AIM: Subsequent to a three-month pilot phase, recruiting patients for the newly established BFCC (Baltic Fracture Competence Centre) transnational fracture registry, a validation of the data quality needed to be carried out, applying a standardized method. METHOD: During the literature research, the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Frese, Jasper, Gode, Annalice, Heinrichs, Gerhard, Will, Armin, Schulz, Arndt-Peter
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6921413/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31852451
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0862-1
_version_ 1783481156328488960
author Frese, Jasper
Gode, Annalice
Heinrichs, Gerhard
Will, Armin
Schulz, Arndt-Peter
author_facet Frese, Jasper
Gode, Annalice
Heinrichs, Gerhard
Will, Armin
Schulz, Arndt-Peter
author_sort Frese, Jasper
collection PubMed
description AIM: Subsequent to a three-month pilot phase, recruiting patients for the newly established BFCC (Baltic Fracture Competence Centre) transnational fracture registry, a validation of the data quality needed to be carried out, applying a standardized method. METHOD: During the literature research, the method of “adaptive monitoring” fulfilled the requirements of the registry and was applied. It consisted of a three-step audit process; firstly, scoring of the overall data quality, followed by source data verification of a sample size, relative to the scoring result, and finally, feedback to the registry on measures to improve data quality. Statistical methods for scoring of data quality and visualisation of discrepancies between registry data and source data were developed and applied. RESULTS: Initially, the data quality of the registry scored as medium. During source data verification, missing items in the registry, causing medium data quality, turned out to be absent in the source as well. A subsequent adaptation of the score evaluated the registry’s data quality as good. It was suggested to add variables to some items in order to improve the accuracy of the registry. DISCUSSION: The application of the method of adaptive monitoring has only been published by Jacke et al., with a similar improvement of the scoring result following the audit process. Displaying data from the registry in graphs helped to find missing items and discover issues with data formats. Graphically comparing the degree of agreement between the registry and source data allowed to discover systematic faults. CONCLUSIONS: The method of adaptive monitoring gives a substantiated guideline for systematically evaluating and monitoring a registry’s data quality and is currently second to none. The resulting transparency of the registry’s data quality could be helpful in annual reports, as published by most major registries. As the method has been rarely applied, further successive applications in established registries would be desirable.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6921413
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69214132019-12-30 Validating a transnational fracture treatment registry using a standardized method Frese, Jasper Gode, Annalice Heinrichs, Gerhard Will, Armin Schulz, Arndt-Peter BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article AIM: Subsequent to a three-month pilot phase, recruiting patients for the newly established BFCC (Baltic Fracture Competence Centre) transnational fracture registry, a validation of the data quality needed to be carried out, applying a standardized method. METHOD: During the literature research, the method of “adaptive monitoring” fulfilled the requirements of the registry and was applied. It consisted of a three-step audit process; firstly, scoring of the overall data quality, followed by source data verification of a sample size, relative to the scoring result, and finally, feedback to the registry on measures to improve data quality. Statistical methods for scoring of data quality and visualisation of discrepancies between registry data and source data were developed and applied. RESULTS: Initially, the data quality of the registry scored as medium. During source data verification, missing items in the registry, causing medium data quality, turned out to be absent in the source as well. A subsequent adaptation of the score evaluated the registry’s data quality as good. It was suggested to add variables to some items in order to improve the accuracy of the registry. DISCUSSION: The application of the method of adaptive monitoring has only been published by Jacke et al., with a similar improvement of the scoring result following the audit process. Displaying data from the registry in graphs helped to find missing items and discover issues with data formats. Graphically comparing the degree of agreement between the registry and source data allowed to discover systematic faults. CONCLUSIONS: The method of adaptive monitoring gives a substantiated guideline for systematically evaluating and monitoring a registry’s data quality and is currently second to none. The resulting transparency of the registry’s data quality could be helpful in annual reports, as published by most major registries. As the method has been rarely applied, further successive applications in established registries would be desirable. BioMed Central 2019-12-18 /pmc/articles/PMC6921413/ /pubmed/31852451 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0862-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Frese, Jasper
Gode, Annalice
Heinrichs, Gerhard
Will, Armin
Schulz, Arndt-Peter
Validating a transnational fracture treatment registry using a standardized method
title Validating a transnational fracture treatment registry using a standardized method
title_full Validating a transnational fracture treatment registry using a standardized method
title_fullStr Validating a transnational fracture treatment registry using a standardized method
title_full_unstemmed Validating a transnational fracture treatment registry using a standardized method
title_short Validating a transnational fracture treatment registry using a standardized method
title_sort validating a transnational fracture treatment registry using a standardized method
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6921413/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31852451
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0862-1
work_keys_str_mv AT fresejasper validatingatransnationalfracturetreatmentregistryusingastandardizedmethod
AT godeannalice validatingatransnationalfracturetreatmentregistryusingastandardizedmethod
AT heinrichsgerhard validatingatransnationalfracturetreatmentregistryusingastandardizedmethod
AT willarmin validatingatransnationalfracturetreatmentregistryusingastandardizedmethod
AT schulzarndtpeter validatingatransnationalfracturetreatmentregistryusingastandardizedmethod