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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |