Large-scale electronic health record research introduces biases compared to traditional manually curated retrospective research. We used data from a community-acquired pneumonia study for which we had a gold standard to illustrate such biases. The challenges include data inaccuracy, incompleteness, and complexity, and they can produce in distorted results. We found that a naïve approach approximated the gold standard, but errors on a minority of cases shifted mortality substantially. Manual review revealed errors in both selecting and characterizing the cohort, and narrowing the cohort improved the result. Nevertheless, a significantly narrowed cohort might contain its own biases that would be difficult to estimate.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3149555 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.5210/disco.v6i0.3581 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!