Evaluating the quality of prostate cancer diagnosis recording in CPRD GOLD and CPRD Aurum primary care databases for observational research: A study using linked English electronic health records

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY Cancer Epidemiology Pub Date : 2024-11-30 DOI:10.1016/j.canep.2024.102715
Gayasha Somathilake , Elizabeth Ford , Jo Armes , Sotiris Moschoyiannis , Michelle Collins , Patrick Francsics , Agnieszka Lemanska
{"title":"Evaluating the quality of prostate cancer diagnosis recording in CPRD GOLD and CPRD Aurum primary care databases for observational research: A study using linked English electronic health records","authors":"Gayasha Somathilake ,&nbsp;Elizabeth Ford ,&nbsp;Jo Armes ,&nbsp;Sotiris Moschoyiannis ,&nbsp;Michelle Collins ,&nbsp;Patrick Francsics ,&nbsp;Agnieszka Lemanska","doi":"10.1016/j.canep.2024.102715","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Primary care data in the UK are widely used for cancer research, but the reliability of recording key events like diagnoses remains uncertain. Although data linkage can improve reliability, its costs, time requirements, and sample size constraints may discourage its use. We evaluated accuracy, completeness, and date concordance of prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis recording in Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD and Aurum compared to linked Cancer Registry (CR) and Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) Admitted Patient Care (APC) in England.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Incident PCa diagnoses (2000–2016) for males aged ≥46 at diagnosis who remained registered with their General Practitioner (GP) by age 65 and were recorded in at least one data source were analysed. Accuracy was the proportion of diagnoses recorded in GOLD or Aurum with a corresponding record in CR or HES. Completeness was the proportion of CR or HES diagnoses with a corresponding record in GOLD or Aurum.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The final cohorts for comparisons included 29,500 records for GOLD and 26,475 for Aurum. Compared to CR, GOLD was 86 % accurate and 65 % complete, while Aurum was 87 % accurate and 77 % complete. Compared to HES, GOLD was 76 % accurate and 60 % complete, and Aurum was 79 % accurate and 70 % complete. Concordance in diagnosis dates improved over time in both GOLD and Aurum, with 93 % of diagnoses recorded within a year compared to CR, and 66 % (GOLD) and 71 % (Aurum) compared to HES. Delays of 2–3 weeks in primary care diagnosis recording were observed compared to CR, whereas most diagnoses appeared at least 3 months earlier in primary care than in HES.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Aurum demonstrated better accuracy and completeness for PCa diagnosis recording than GOLD. However, linkage to HES or CR is recommended for improved case capture. Researchers should address the limitations of each data source to ensure research validity.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56322,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Epidemiology","volume":"94 ","pages":"Article 102715"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877782124001942","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Primary care data in the UK are widely used for cancer research, but the reliability of recording key events like diagnoses remains uncertain. Although data linkage can improve reliability, its costs, time requirements, and sample size constraints may discourage its use. We evaluated accuracy, completeness, and date concordance of prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis recording in Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD and Aurum compared to linked Cancer Registry (CR) and Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) Admitted Patient Care (APC) in England.

Methods

Incident PCa diagnoses (2000–2016) for males aged ≥46 at diagnosis who remained registered with their General Practitioner (GP) by age 65 and were recorded in at least one data source were analysed. Accuracy was the proportion of diagnoses recorded in GOLD or Aurum with a corresponding record in CR or HES. Completeness was the proportion of CR or HES diagnoses with a corresponding record in GOLD or Aurum.

Results

The final cohorts for comparisons included 29,500 records for GOLD and 26,475 for Aurum. Compared to CR, GOLD was 86 % accurate and 65 % complete, while Aurum was 87 % accurate and 77 % complete. Compared to HES, GOLD was 76 % accurate and 60 % complete, and Aurum was 79 % accurate and 70 % complete. Concordance in diagnosis dates improved over time in both GOLD and Aurum, with 93 % of diagnoses recorded within a year compared to CR, and 66 % (GOLD) and 71 % (Aurum) compared to HES. Delays of 2–3 weeks in primary care diagnosis recording were observed compared to CR, whereas most diagnoses appeared at least 3 months earlier in primary care than in HES.

Conclusions

Aurum demonstrated better accuracy and completeness for PCa diagnosis recording than GOLD. However, linkage to HES or CR is recommended for improved case capture. Researchers should address the limitations of each data source to ensure research validity.
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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cancer Epidemiology
Cancer Epidemiology 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.80%
发文量
200
审稿时长
39 days
期刊介绍: Cancer Epidemiology is dedicated to increasing understanding about cancer causes, prevention and control. The scope of the journal embraces all aspects of cancer epidemiology including: • Descriptive epidemiology • Studies of risk factors for disease initiation, development and prognosis • Screening and early detection • Prevention and control • Methodological issues The journal publishes original research articles (full length and short reports), systematic reviews and meta-analyses, editorials, commentaries and letters to the editor commenting on previously published research.
期刊最新文献
Evaluating the quality of prostate cancer diagnosis recording in CPRD GOLD and CPRD Aurum primary care databases for observational research: A study using linked English electronic health records Differences in recording of cancer diagnosis between datasets in England: A population-based study of linked cancer registration, hospital, and primary care data Trends in incidence, mortality and survival of gastric cancer in Xiamen, China from 2011 to 2020: A population-based study Editorial Board Updated cancer burden in oldest old: A population-based study using 2022 Globocan estimates.
×
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