Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparing medical history data derived from electronic health records and survey answers in the All of Us Research Program.
Sulieman, Lina; Cronin, Robert M; Carroll, Robert J; Natarajan, Karthik; Marginean, Kayla; Mapes, Brandy; Roden, Dan; Harris, Paul; Ramirez, Andrea.
Afiliación
  • Sulieman L; Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
  • Cronin RM; Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
  • Carroll RJ; Department of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
  • Natarajan K; Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
  • Marginean K; Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.
  • Mapes B; Vanderbilt Institute of Clinical and Translational Research, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
  • Roden D; Vanderbilt Institute of Clinical and Translational Research, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
  • Harris P; Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
  • Ramirez A; Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
J Am Med Inform Assoc ; 29(7): 1131-1141, 2022 06 14.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35396991
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

A participant's medical history is important in clinical research and can be captured from electronic health records (EHRs) and self-reported surveys. Both can be incomplete, EHR due to documentation gaps or lack of interoperability and surveys due to recall bias or limited health literacy. This analysis compares medical history collected in the All of Us Research Program through both surveys and EHRs. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

The All of Us medical history survey includes self-report questionnaire that asks about diagnoses to over 150 medical conditions organized into 12 disease categories. In each category, we identified the 3 most and least frequent self-reported diagnoses and retrieved their analogues from EHRs. We calculated agreement scores and extracted participant demographic characteristics for each comparison set.

RESULTS:

The 4th All of Us dataset release includes data from 314 994 participants; 28.3% of whom completed medical history surveys, and 65.5% of whom had EHR data. Hearing and vision category within the survey had the highest number of responses, but the second lowest positive agreement with the EHR (0.21). The Infectious disease category had the lowest positive agreement (0.12). Cancer conditions had the highest positive agreement (0.45) between the 2 data sources. DISCUSSION AND

CONCLUSION:

Our study quantified the agreement of medical history between 2 sources-EHRs and self-reported surveys. Conditions that are usually undocumented in EHRs had low agreement scores, demonstrating that survey data can supplement EHR data. Disagreement between EHR and survey can help identify possible missing records and guide researchers to adjust for biases.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Registros Electrónicos de Salud / Salud Poblacional Tipo de estudio: Qualitative_research Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Am Med Inform Assoc Asunto de la revista: INFORMATICA MEDICA Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Registros Electrónicos de Salud / Salud Poblacional Tipo de estudio: Qualitative_research Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Am Med Inform Assoc Asunto de la revista: INFORMATICA MEDICA Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos