多站点干预项目评估中的数据清理。

Gavin Welch, Friedrich von Recklinghausen, Andreas Taenzer, Lucy Savitz, Lisa Weiss
{"title":"多站点干预项目评估中的数据清理。","authors":"Gavin Welch,&nbsp;Friedrich von Recklinghausen,&nbsp;Andreas Taenzer,&nbsp;Lucy Savitz,&nbsp;Lisa Weiss","doi":"10.5334/egems.196","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>The High Value Healthcare Collaborative (HVHC) sepsis project was a two-year multi-site project where Member health care delivery systems worked on improving sepsis care using a dissemination & implementation framework designed by HVHC. As part of the project evaluation, participating Members provided 5 data submissions over the project period. Members created data files using a uniform specification, but the data sources and methods used to create the data sets differed. Extensive data cleaning was necessary to get a data set usable for the evaluation analysis.</p><p><strong>Case description: </strong>HVHC was the coordinating center for the project and received and cleaned all data submissions. Submissions received 3 sequentially more detailed levels of checking by HVHC. The most detailed level evaluated validity by comparing values within-Member over time and between Member. For a subset of episodes Member-submitted data were compared to matched Medicare claims data.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Inconsistencies in data submissions, particularly for length-of-stay variables were common in early submissions and decreased with subsequent submissions. Multiple resubmissions were sometimes required to get clean data. Data checking also uncovered a systematic difference in the way Medicare and some members defined intensive care unit stay.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Data checking is a critical for ensuring valid analytic results for projects using electronic health record data. It is important to budget sufficient resources for data checking. Interim data submissions and checks help find anomalies early. Data resubmissions should be checked as fixes can introduce new errors. Communicating with those responsible for creating the data set provides critical information.</p>","PeriodicalId":72880,"journal":{"name":"EGEMS (Washington, DC)","volume":"5 3","pages":"4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5983076/pdf/","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Data Cleaning in the Evaluation of a Multi-Site Intervention Project.\",\"authors\":\"Gavin Welch,&nbsp;Friedrich von Recklinghausen,&nbsp;Andreas Taenzer,&nbsp;Lucy Savitz,&nbsp;Lisa Weiss\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/egems.196\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>The High Value Healthcare Collaborative (HVHC) sepsis project was a two-year multi-site project where Member health care delivery systems worked on improving sepsis care using a dissemination & implementation framework designed by HVHC. As part of the project evaluation, participating Members provided 5 data submissions over the project period. Members created data files using a uniform specification, but the data sources and methods used to create the data sets differed. Extensive data cleaning was necessary to get a data set usable for the evaluation analysis.</p><p><strong>Case description: </strong>HVHC was the coordinating center for the project and received and cleaned all data submissions. Submissions received 3 sequentially more detailed levels of checking by HVHC. The most detailed level evaluated validity by comparing values within-Member over time and between Member. For a subset of episodes Member-submitted data were compared to matched Medicare claims data.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Inconsistencies in data submissions, particularly for length-of-stay variables were common in early submissions and decreased with subsequent submissions. Multiple resubmissions were sometimes required to get clean data. Data checking also uncovered a systematic difference in the way Medicare and some members defined intensive care unit stay.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Data checking is a critical for ensuring valid analytic results for projects using electronic health record data. It is important to budget sufficient resources for data checking. Interim data submissions and checks help find anomalies early. Data resubmissions should be checked as fixes can introduce new errors. Communicating with those responsible for creating the data set provides critical information.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72880,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EGEMS (Washington, DC)\",\"volume\":\"5 3\",\"pages\":\"4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-12-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5983076/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EGEMS (Washington, DC)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/egems.196\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EGEMS (Washington, DC)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/egems.196","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

背景:高价值医疗保健协作(HVHC)败血症项目是一个为期两年的多站点项目,成员医疗保健提供系统使用HVHC设计的传播和实施框架致力于改善败血症护理。作为项目评估的一部分,参与成员在项目期间提交了5份数据。成员使用统一的规范创建数据文件,但是用于创建数据集的数据源和方法不同。为了获得可用于评估分析的数据集,需要进行大量的数据清理。案例描述:HVHC是该项目的协调中心,负责接收和清理所有提交的数据。HVHC对提交的作品依次进行了3次更详细的检查。最详细的级别通过比较成员内部和成员之间的值来评估有效性。对于一部分患者提交的数据与匹配的医疗保险索赔数据进行比较。发现:数据提交的不一致,特别是在停留时间变量方面,在早期提交中很常见,随着后续提交而减少。有时需要多次重新提交以获得干净的数据。数据检查还发现,医疗保险和一些成员在定义重症监护病房的方式上存在系统性差异。结论:数据检查对于确保使用电子健康记录数据的项目的有效分析结果至关重要。为数据检查预算足够的资源是很重要的。中期数据提交和检查有助于及早发现异常。应该检查重新提交的数据,因为修复可能会引入新的错误。与负责创建数据集的人员进行通信可以提供关键信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Data Cleaning in the Evaluation of a Multi-Site Intervention Project.

Context: The High Value Healthcare Collaborative (HVHC) sepsis project was a two-year multi-site project where Member health care delivery systems worked on improving sepsis care using a dissemination & implementation framework designed by HVHC. As part of the project evaluation, participating Members provided 5 data submissions over the project period. Members created data files using a uniform specification, but the data sources and methods used to create the data sets differed. Extensive data cleaning was necessary to get a data set usable for the evaluation analysis.

Case description: HVHC was the coordinating center for the project and received and cleaned all data submissions. Submissions received 3 sequentially more detailed levels of checking by HVHC. The most detailed level evaluated validity by comparing values within-Member over time and between Member. For a subset of episodes Member-submitted data were compared to matched Medicare claims data.

Findings: Inconsistencies in data submissions, particularly for length-of-stay variables were common in early submissions and decreased with subsequent submissions. Multiple resubmissions were sometimes required to get clean data. Data checking also uncovered a systematic difference in the way Medicare and some members defined intensive care unit stay.

Conclusions: Data checking is a critical for ensuring valid analytic results for projects using electronic health record data. It is important to budget sufficient resources for data checking. Interim data submissions and checks help find anomalies early. Data resubmissions should be checked as fixes can introduce new errors. Communicating with those responsible for creating the data set provides critical information.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Implementing a Novel Quality Improvement-Based Approach to Data Quality Monitoring and Enhancement in a Multipurpose Clinical Registry. A Spatial Analysis of Health Disparities Associated with Antibiotic Resistant Infections in Children Living in Atlanta (2002–2010) Predicting the Incidence of Pressure Ulcers in the Intensive Care Unit Using Machine Learning Applying a Commercialization-Readiness Framework to Optimize Value for Achieving Sustainability of an Electronic Health Data Research Network and Its Data Capabilities: The SAFTINet Experience. Innovative Data Science to Transform Health Care: All the Pieces Matter
×
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