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 2.3 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY Cancer Epidemiology Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub 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":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","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":"2024/11/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","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
评价CPRD GOLD和CPRD Aurum初级保健数据库中用于观察性研究的前列腺癌诊断记录的质量:一项使用相关英文电子健康记录的研究
英国的初级保健数据被广泛用于癌症研究,但记录关键事件(如诊断)的可靠性仍不确定。虽然数据链接可以提高可靠性,但其成本、时间要求和样本量限制可能会阻碍其使用。我们评估了临床实践研究数据链(CPRD) GOLD和Aurum中前列腺癌(PCa)诊断记录的准确性、完整性和日期一致性,并将其与英国癌症登记(CR)和医院事件统计(HES)住院患者护理(APC)相比较。方法对诊断时年龄≥46岁、65岁前仍在全科医生(GP)注册并记录在至少一个数据源中的男性的PCa诊断(2000-2016年)进行分析。准确性是指在GOLD或Aurum中记录的诊断与CR或HES中相应记录的比例。完全性是指CR或HES诊断在GOLD或Aurum中有相应记录的比例。结果用于比较的最终队列包括GOLD的29,500条记录和Aurum的26,475条记录。与CR相比,GOLD的准确率为86 %,完成率为65 %,而Aurum的准确率为87 %,完成率为77 %。与HES相比,GOLD的准确率为76 %,完成率为60 %;Aurum的准确率为79 %,完成率为70 %。GOLD和Aurum在诊断日期上的一致性随着时间的推移而改善,与CR相比,一年内记录的诊断为93 %,与HES相比,66 % (GOLD)和71 % (Aurum)。与CR相比,观察到初级保健诊断记录延迟2-3周,而大多数初级保健诊断比HES至少早3个月。结论超声对前列腺癌诊断记录的准确性和完整性优于GOLD。然而,建议与HES或CR联系,以改进病例捕获。研究人员应该解决每个数据源的局限性,以确保研究的有效性。
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
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
Cervical cancer in foreign-born women living in Italy: A systematic review of population-based studies Comparing the national cancer waiting times dataset with other linked electronic health records to measure treatment timeliness: A national cohort study of kidney cancer in England Scoping review: Investigating target trial emulation approaches in oncology research Temporal trends of early-onset cancers among Canadian jurisdictions covered in the CiNA dataset Adherence to the 2018 WCRF/AICR Cancer Prevention Recommendations is associated with lower breast cancer incidence: A real-world prospective analysis from the Moli-sani Study and exploration of biological pathways
×
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:604180095
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