Robust estimation of infant feeding indicators by data quality assessment of longitudinal electronic health records from birth up to 18 months of life

Electronic Health Record Data Quality and Performance Assessments: Scoping Review

“…-Correctness/Accuracy: whether patient records are free from errors or inconsistencies when the information provided in them is true 10,13 -Currency/Recency: whether data was entered into the EHR within a clinically relevant timeframe and/or is representative of the patient state at a given time of interest 10,13 -Fairness (or conversely, bias): the degree to which data collection, augmentation, and application are free from unwarranted over-or underrepresentation of individual data elements or characteristics -Stability (or conversely, temporal variability): whether temporally dependent variables change according to predefined expectations 10,12 -Shareability: whether data can be shared directly, easily, and with no information loss 3 -Robustness: the percent of patient records with tolerable (e.g., inaccurate, inconsistent, outdated information) vs. intolerable (e.g., missing required information) data quality problems. 24 We additionally included studies reporting on data imputation methods, defined as techniques used to fill in missing values in an EHR, such as through statistical approximation and/or the application of AI. Exclusion criteria: We excluded tangential analyses of data quality in articles focused primarily on clinical outcomes.…”

“…Full-text review excluded a further 25 articles owing to reasons listed in (Figure 1), leaving a final total of 26 original research studies. [2][3][4][5][6]8,9,14,19,22,[24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39] Cohen's kappa between the different pairs of reviewers ranged from 0.28 to 0.54 during the screening process and from 0.54 to 1.00 during the full-text review. Study characteristics are shown in (Figure 2) and (Supplementary Table S3).…”

“…Exactly half of the identified articles targeted general EHR data quality analysis [4][5][6]19,22,[27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34] , while the other half focused on a particular specialty or diagnosis (Figure 2a). 2,3,8,9,14,[24][25][26][35][36][37][38][39] The latter included primary care (n=3, 12%) [37][38][39] , cardiovascular disease (n=3, 12%) 8,35,36 , anesthesia/ pain medicine (n=2, 8%) 14,26 , intensive care units (n=2, 8%) 3,25 , and pediatrics 24 , oncology 2 , and infectious disease (n=1 each, 4%). 9 Article quality assessment conducted as part of our review process identified 14 (54%) of the articles [2][3][4][5][6]8,9,19,…”

“…2,3,8,9,14,[24][25][26][35][36][37][38][39] The latter included primary care (n=3, 12%) [37][38][39] , cardiovascular disease (n=3, 12%) 8,35,36 , anesthesia/ pain medicine (n=2, 8%) 14,26 , intensive care units (n=2, 8%) 3,25 , and pediatrics 24 , oncology 2 , and infectious disease (n=1 each, 4%). 9 Article quality assessment conducted as part of our review process identified 14 (54%) of the articles [2][3][4][5][6]8,9,19,22,[24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38] s...…”

Diseño, construcción y evaluación de repositorios estandarizados con calidad de datos asegurada para la monitorización de la atención a la alimentación infantil

“…Un grupo de expertos formado por 4 clínicos líderes del área de salud en este dominio y 3 expertos en tecnología de la información, autores del artículo (García-de-León-Chocano et al, 2021), definieron el proceso de aseguramiento de DQ para lograr una estimación robusta de indicadores de la alimentación infantil. Los criterios de inclusión fueron todos los niños con seguimiento de alimentación infantil en cualquiera de los tres centros públicos de salud del Área de Salud V. Definimos un criterio de exclusión general para los sujetos que no cumplen con un seguimiento mínimo: menos de 3 revisiones del Programa del Niño Sano, primera revisión después de los 120 días de edad o última revisión antes de los 180 días.…”