Cargando…

Assessing Cancer History Accuracy in Primary Care Electronic Health Records Through Cancer Registry Linkage

BACKGROUND: Many cancer survivors receive primary care in community health centers (CHCs). Cancer history is an important factor to consider in the provision of primary care, yet little is known about the completeness or accuracy of cancer history data contained in CHC electronic health records (EHR...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hoopes, Megan, Voss, Robert, Angier, Heather, Marino, Miguel, Schmidt, Teresa, DeVoe, Jennifer E, Soule, Jeffrey, Huguet, Nathalie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8246795/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33377908
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djaa210
_version_ 1783716387307388928
author Hoopes, Megan
Voss, Robert
Angier, Heather
Marino, Miguel
Schmidt, Teresa
DeVoe, Jennifer E
Soule, Jeffrey
Huguet, Nathalie
author_facet Hoopes, Megan
Voss, Robert
Angier, Heather
Marino, Miguel
Schmidt, Teresa
DeVoe, Jennifer E
Soule, Jeffrey
Huguet, Nathalie
author_sort Hoopes, Megan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Many cancer survivors receive primary care in community health centers (CHCs). Cancer history is an important factor to consider in the provision of primary care, yet little is known about the completeness or accuracy of cancer history data contained in CHC electronic health records (EHRs). METHODS: We probabilistically linked EHR data from more than1.5 million adult CHC patients to state cancer registries in California, Oregon, and Washington and estimated measures of agreement (eg, kappa, sensitivity, specificity). We compared demographic and clinical characteristics of cancer patients as estimated by each data source, evaluating distributional differences with absolute standardized mean differences. RESULTS: A total 74 707 cancer patients were identified between the 2 sources (EHR only, n = 22 730; registry only, n = 23 616; both, n = 28 361). Nearly one-half of cancer patients identified in registries were missing cancer documentation in the EHR. Overall agreement of cancer ascertainment in the EHR vs cancer registries (gold standard) was moderate (kappa = 0.535). Cancer site–specific agreement ranged from substantial (eg, prostate and female breast; kappa > 0.60) to fair (melanoma and cervix; kappa < 0.40). Comparing population characteristics of cancer patients as ascertained from each data source, groups were similar for sex, age, and federal poverty level, but EHR-recorded cases showed greater medical complexity than those ascertained from cancer registries. CONCLUSIONS: Agreement between EHR and cancer registry data was moderate and varied by cancer site. These findings suggest the need for strategies to improve capture of cancer history information in CHC EHRs to ensure adequate delivery of care and optimal health outcomes for cancer survivors.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8246795
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82467952021-07-02 Assessing Cancer History Accuracy in Primary Care Electronic Health Records Through Cancer Registry Linkage Hoopes, Megan Voss, Robert Angier, Heather Marino, Miguel Schmidt, Teresa DeVoe, Jennifer E Soule, Jeffrey Huguet, Nathalie J Natl Cancer Inst Articles BACKGROUND: Many cancer survivors receive primary care in community health centers (CHCs). Cancer history is an important factor to consider in the provision of primary care, yet little is known about the completeness or accuracy of cancer history data contained in CHC electronic health records (EHRs). METHODS: We probabilistically linked EHR data from more than1.5 million adult CHC patients to state cancer registries in California, Oregon, and Washington and estimated measures of agreement (eg, kappa, sensitivity, specificity). We compared demographic and clinical characteristics of cancer patients as estimated by each data source, evaluating distributional differences with absolute standardized mean differences. RESULTS: A total 74 707 cancer patients were identified between the 2 sources (EHR only, n = 22 730; registry only, n = 23 616; both, n = 28 361). Nearly one-half of cancer patients identified in registries were missing cancer documentation in the EHR. Overall agreement of cancer ascertainment in the EHR vs cancer registries (gold standard) was moderate (kappa = 0.535). Cancer site–specific agreement ranged from substantial (eg, prostate and female breast; kappa > 0.60) to fair (melanoma and cervix; kappa < 0.40). Comparing population characteristics of cancer patients as ascertained from each data source, groups were similar for sex, age, and federal poverty level, but EHR-recorded cases showed greater medical complexity than those ascertained from cancer registries. CONCLUSIONS: Agreement between EHR and cancer registry data was moderate and varied by cancer site. These findings suggest the need for strategies to improve capture of cancer history information in CHC EHRs to ensure adequate delivery of care and optimal health outcomes for cancer survivors. Oxford University Press 2020-12-30 /pmc/articles/PMC8246795/ /pubmed/33377908 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djaa210 Text en © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Articles
Hoopes, Megan
Voss, Robert
Angier, Heather
Marino, Miguel
Schmidt, Teresa
DeVoe, Jennifer E
Soule, Jeffrey
Huguet, Nathalie
Assessing Cancer History Accuracy in Primary Care Electronic Health Records Through Cancer Registry Linkage
title Assessing Cancer History Accuracy in Primary Care Electronic Health Records Through Cancer Registry Linkage
title_full Assessing Cancer History Accuracy in Primary Care Electronic Health Records Through Cancer Registry Linkage
title_fullStr Assessing Cancer History Accuracy in Primary Care Electronic Health Records Through Cancer Registry Linkage
title_full_unstemmed Assessing Cancer History Accuracy in Primary Care Electronic Health Records Through Cancer Registry Linkage
title_short Assessing Cancer History Accuracy in Primary Care Electronic Health Records Through Cancer Registry Linkage
title_sort assessing cancer history accuracy in primary care electronic health records through cancer registry linkage
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8246795/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33377908
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djaa210
work_keys_str_mv AT hoopesmegan assessingcancerhistoryaccuracyinprimarycareelectronichealthrecordsthroughcancerregistrylinkage
AT vossrobert assessingcancerhistoryaccuracyinprimarycareelectronichealthrecordsthroughcancerregistrylinkage
AT angierheather assessingcancerhistoryaccuracyinprimarycareelectronichealthrecordsthroughcancerregistrylinkage
AT marinomiguel assessingcancerhistoryaccuracyinprimarycareelectronichealthrecordsthroughcancerregistrylinkage
AT schmidtteresa assessingcancerhistoryaccuracyinprimarycareelectronichealthrecordsthroughcancerregistrylinkage
AT devoejennifere assessingcancerhistoryaccuracyinprimarycareelectronichealthrecordsthroughcancerregistrylinkage
AT soulejeffrey assessingcancerhistoryaccuracyinprimarycareelectronichealthrecordsthroughcancerregistrylinkage
AT huguetnathalie assessingcancerhistoryaccuracyinprimarycareelectronichealthrecordsthroughcancerregistrylinkage