Validation of US CDC National Death Index mortality data, focusing on differences in race and ethnicity.

IF 4.1 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMJ Health & Care Informatics Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1136/bmjhci-2023-100737
Monica Ter-Minassian, Sundeep S Basra, Eric S Watson, Alphonse J Derus, Michael A Horberg
{"title":"Validation of US CDC National Death Index mortality data, focusing on differences in race and ethnicity.","authors":"Monica Ter-Minassian,&nbsp;Sundeep S Basra,&nbsp;Eric S Watson,&nbsp;Alphonse J Derus,&nbsp;Michael A Horberg","doi":"10.1136/bmjhci-2023-100737","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The US Center for Disease Control and Prevention's National Death Index (NDI) is a gold standard for mortality data, yet matching patients to the database depends on accurate and available key identifiers. Our objective was to evaluate NDI data for future healthcare research studies with mortality outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used a Kaiser Permanente Mid-Atlantic States' Virtual Data Warehouse (KPMAS-VDW) sourced from the Social Security Administration and electronic health records on members enrolled between 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2017. We submitted data to NDI on 1 036 449 members. We compared results from the NDI best match algorithm to the KPMAS-VDW for vital status and death date. We compared probabilistic scores by sex and race and ethnicity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>NDI returned 372 865 (36%) unique possible matches, 663 061 (64%) records not matched to the NDI database and 522 (<1%) rejected records. The NDI algorithm resulted in 38 862 records, presumed dead, with a lower percentage of women, and Asian/Pacific Islander and Hispanic people than presumed alive. There were 27 306 presumed dead members whose death dates matched exactly between the NDI results and VDW, but 1539 did not have an exact match. There were 10 017 additional deaths from NDI results that were not present in the VDW death data.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>NDI data can substantially improve the overall capture of deaths. However, further quality control measures were needed to ensure the accuracy of the NDI best match algorithm.</p>","PeriodicalId":9050,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Health & Care Informatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/41/38/bmjhci-2023-100737.PMC10335466.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Health & Care Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2023-100737","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The US Center for Disease Control and Prevention's National Death Index (NDI) is a gold standard for mortality data, yet matching patients to the database depends on accurate and available key identifiers. Our objective was to evaluate NDI data for future healthcare research studies with mortality outcomes.

Methods: We used a Kaiser Permanente Mid-Atlantic States' Virtual Data Warehouse (KPMAS-VDW) sourced from the Social Security Administration and electronic health records on members enrolled between 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2017. We submitted data to NDI on 1 036 449 members. We compared results from the NDI best match algorithm to the KPMAS-VDW for vital status and death date. We compared probabilistic scores by sex and race and ethnicity.

Results: NDI returned 372 865 (36%) unique possible matches, 663 061 (64%) records not matched to the NDI database and 522 (<1%) rejected records. The NDI algorithm resulted in 38 862 records, presumed dead, with a lower percentage of women, and Asian/Pacific Islander and Hispanic people than presumed alive. There were 27 306 presumed dead members whose death dates matched exactly between the NDI results and VDW, but 1539 did not have an exact match. There were 10 017 additional deaths from NDI results that were not present in the VDW death data.

Conclusions: NDI data can substantially improve the overall capture of deaths. However, further quality control measures were needed to ensure the accuracy of the NDI best match algorithm.

Abstract Image

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
美国疾病控制与预防中心国家死亡指数死亡率数据的验证,重点关注种族和民族差异。
目的:美国疾病控制和预防中心的国家死亡指数(NDI)是死亡率数据的黄金标准,但将患者与数据库匹配取决于准确和可用的关键标识符。我们的目的是评估NDI数据,为未来的医疗保健研究提供死亡率结果。方法:我们使用了Kaiser Permanente中大西洋州的虚拟数据仓库(KPMAS-VDW),数据来源于社会保障管理局和2005年1月1日至2017年12月31日注册会员的电子健康记录。我们向NDI提交了1 036 449个会员的数据。我们将NDI最佳匹配算法的结果与KPMAS-VDW的生命状态和死亡日期进行了比较。我们比较了性别、种族和民族的概率分数。结果:NDI返回了372 865条(36%)唯一可能匹配的记录,663 061条(64%)与NDI数据库不匹配,522条(结论:NDI数据可以大大提高对死亡的总体捕获。然而,需要进一步的质量控制措施来确保NDI最佳匹配算法的准确性。
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
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
4.90%
发文量
40
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
Scaling equitable artificial intelligence in healthcare with machine learning operations. Understanding prescribing errors for system optimisation: the technology-related error mechanism classification. Detection of hypertension from pharyngeal images using deep learning algorithm in primary care settings in Japan. PubMed captures more fine-grained bibliographic data on scientific commentary than Web of Science: a comparative analysis. Method to apply temporal graph analysis on electronic patient record data to explore healthcare professional-patient interaction intensity: a cohort study.
×
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