Abstract

BackgroundEnormous amounts of data are recorded routinely in health care as part of the care process, primarily for managing individual patient care. There are significant opportunities to use these data for other purposes, many of which would contribute to establishing a learning health system. This is particularly true for data recorded in primary care settings, as in many countries, these are the first place patients turn to for most health problems.ObjectiveIn this paper, we discuss whether data that are recorded routinely as part of the health care process in primary care are actually fit to use for other purposes such as research and quality of health care indicators, how the original purpose may affect the extent to which the data are fit for another purpose, and the mechanisms behind these effects. In doing so, we want to identify possible sources of bias that are relevant for the use and reuse of these type of data.MethodsThis paper is based on the authors’ experience as users of electronic health records data, as general practitioners, health informatics experts, and health services researchers. It is a product of the discussions they had during the Translational Research and Patient Safety in Europe (TRANSFoRm) project, which was funded by the European Commission and sought to develop, pilot, and evaluate a core information architecture for the learning health system in Europe, based on primary care electronic health records.ResultsWe first describe the different stages in the processing of electronic health record data, as well as the different purposes for which these data are used. Given the different data processing steps and purposes, we then discuss the possible mechanisms for each individual data processing step that can generate biased outcomes. We identified 13 possible sources of bias. Four of them are related to the organization of a health care system, whereas some are of a more technical nature.ConclusionsThere are a substantial number of possible sources of bias; very little is known about the size and direction of their impact. However, anyone that uses or reuses data that were recorded as part of the health care process (such as researchers and clinicians) should be aware of the associated data collection process and environmental influences that can affect the quality of the data. Our stepwise, actor- and purpose-oriented approach may help to identify these possible sources of bias. Unless data quality issues are better understood and unless adequate controls are embedded throughout the data lifecycle, data-driven health care will not live up to its expectations. We need a data quality research agenda to devise the appropriate instruments needed to assess the magnitude of each of the possible sources of bias, and then start measuring their impact. The possible sources of bias described in this paper serve as a starting point for this research agenda.

Highlights

  • Electronic Health Records: A Potential GoldmineResearchers have long seen the reuse of large-scale, routine health care data as a means of efficiently addressing many research questions of interest

  • This paper is based on the authors’ experience as users of electronic health records data, as general practitioners, health informatics experts, and health services researchers. It is a product of the discussions they had during the Translational Research and Patient Safety in Europe (TRANSFoRm) project, which was funded by the European Commission and sought to develop, pilot, and evaluate a core information architecture for the learning health system in Europe, based on primary care electronic health records

  • There are a substantial number of possible sources of bias; very little is known about the size and direction of their impact

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Electronic Health Records: A Potential GoldmineResearchers have long seen the reuse of large-scale, routine health care data as a means of efficiently addressing many research questions of interest. A similar development has taken place in the Netherlands, where, in the early 1990s, the Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL) developed its Netherlands Information Network of General Practice [4], named NIVEL Primary Care Database (NIVEL-PCD) [5,6]. Belgium has its Intego Network [6,7] and France, until recently, had its l’Observatoire de la médecine générale société [8] These databases provide valuable information about the use of health services and developments in population health. There are significant opportunities to use these data for other purposes, many of which would contribute to establishing a learning health system This is true for data recorded in primary care settings, as in many countries, these are the first place patients turn to for most health problems

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call