A Quantitative Bias Analysis Approach to Informative Presence Bias in Electronic Health Records.

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Epidemiology Pub Date : 2024-04-18 DOI:10.1097/ede.0000000000001714
Hanxi Zhang, Amy S Clark, Rebecca A Hubbard
{"title":"A Quantitative Bias Analysis Approach to Informative Presence Bias in Electronic Health Records.","authors":"Hanxi Zhang, Amy S Clark, Rebecca A Hubbard","doi":"10.1097/ede.0000000000001714","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Accurate outcome and exposure ascertainment in electronic health record (EHR) data, referred to as EHR phenotyping, relies on the completeness and accuracy of EHR data for each individual. However, some individuals, such as those with a greater comorbidity burden, visit the health care system more frequently and thus have more complete data, compared with others. Ignoring such dependence of exposure and outcome misclassification on visit frequency can bias estimates of associations in EHR analysis. We developed a framework for describing the structure of outcome and exposure misclassification due to informative visit processes in EHR data and assessed the utility of a quantitative bias analysis approach to adjusting for bias induced by informative visit patterns. Using simulations, we found that this method produced unbiased estimates across all informative visit structures, if the phenotype sensitivity and specificity were correctly specified. We applied this method in an example where the association between diabetes and progression-free survival in metastatic breast cancer patients may be subject to informative presence bias. The quantitative bias analysis approach allowed us to evaluate robustness of results to informative presence bias and indicated that findings were unlikely to change across a range of plausible values for phenotype sensitivity and specificity. Researchers using EHR data should carefully consider the informative visit structure reflected in their data and use appropriate approaches such as the quantitative bias analysis approach described here to evaluate robustness of study findings.","PeriodicalId":11779,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiology","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ede.0000000000001714","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Accurate outcome and exposure ascertainment in electronic health record (EHR) data, referred to as EHR phenotyping, relies on the completeness and accuracy of EHR data for each individual. However, some individuals, such as those with a greater comorbidity burden, visit the health care system more frequently and thus have more complete data, compared with others. Ignoring such dependence of exposure and outcome misclassification on visit frequency can bias estimates of associations in EHR analysis. We developed a framework for describing the structure of outcome and exposure misclassification due to informative visit processes in EHR data and assessed the utility of a quantitative bias analysis approach to adjusting for bias induced by informative visit patterns. Using simulations, we found that this method produced unbiased estimates across all informative visit structures, if the phenotype sensitivity and specificity were correctly specified. We applied this method in an example where the association between diabetes and progression-free survival in metastatic breast cancer patients may be subject to informative presence bias. The quantitative bias analysis approach allowed us to evaluate robustness of results to informative presence bias and indicated that findings were unlikely to change across a range of plausible values for phenotype sensitivity and specificity. Researchers using EHR data should carefully consider the informative visit structure reflected in their data and use appropriate approaches such as the quantitative bias analysis approach described here to evaluate robustness of study findings.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
电子健康记录中信息存在偏差的定量偏差分析方法。
电子健康记录(EHR)数据中准确的结果和暴露确定,即 EHR 表型分析,依赖于每个人 EHR 数据的完整性和准确性。然而,与其他人相比,有些人,如合并症负担较重的人,会更频繁地访问医疗保健系统,因此拥有更完整的数据。如果忽略了暴露和结果误分类对就诊频率的这种依赖性,就会使电子病历分析中对相关性的估计出现偏差。我们建立了一个框架,用于描述电子病历数据中信息性就诊过程导致的结果和暴露误分类的结构,并评估了定量偏倚分析方法在调整信息性就诊模式导致的偏倚方面的实用性。通过模拟实验,我们发现如果表型敏感性和特异性指定正确,该方法可在所有信息性就诊结构中产生无偏估计值。我们在一个例子中应用了这种方法,在这个例子中,转移性乳腺癌患者的糖尿病与无进展生存期之间的关联可能会受到信息性存在偏差的影响。定量偏倚分析方法使我们能够评估结果对信息性存在偏倚的稳健性,并表明在表型敏感性和特异性的一系列可信值范围内,研究结果不太可能发生变化。使用电子病历数据的研究人员应仔细考虑其数据中反映的信息性就诊结构,并使用适当的方法(如本文所述的定量偏倚分析方法)来评估研究结果的稳健性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Epidemiology
Epidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
3.70%
发文量
177
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Epidemiology publishes original research from all fields of epidemiology. The journal also welcomes review articles and meta-analyses, novel hypotheses, descriptions and applications of new methods, and discussions of research theory or public health policy. We give special consideration to papers from developing countries.
期刊最新文献
Adjusting adjustments: Using external data to estimate the impact of different confounder sets on published associations. Low-level PM2.5 exposure, Cardiovascular and Non-accidental Mortality, and Related Health Disparities in 12 U.S. States. A structural description of biases that generate immortal time. Associations Between Gestational Residential Radon Exposure and Term Low Birthweight in Connecticut, USA. Prenatal Exposure to Nonpersistent Chemicals and Fetal-to-childhood Growth Trajectories.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1