Factors Affecting Accuracy of Data Abstracted from Medical Records.

Medical record abstraction (MRA) is often cited as a significant source of error in research data, yet MRA methodology has rarely been the subject of investigation. Lack of a common framework has hindered application of the extant literature in practice, and, until now, there were no evidence-based...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Meredith N Zozus, Carl Pieper, Constance M Johnson, Todd R Johnson, Amy Franklin, Jack Smith, Jiajie Zhang
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2015-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4615628?pdf=render
id doaj-10b39450622e49d3921c38baf7cc271b
record_format Article
spelling doaj-10b39450622e49d3921c38baf7cc271b2020-11-24T22:14:34ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032015-01-011010e013864910.1371/journal.pone.0138649Factors Affecting Accuracy of Data Abstracted from Medical Records.Meredith N ZozusCarl PieperConstance M JohnsonTodd R JohnsonAmy FranklinJack SmithJiajie ZhangMedical record abstraction (MRA) is often cited as a significant source of error in research data, yet MRA methodology has rarely been the subject of investigation. Lack of a common framework has hindered application of the extant literature in practice, and, until now, there were no evidence-based guidelines for ensuring data quality in MRA. We aimed to identify the factors affecting the accuracy of data abstracted from medical records and to generate a framework for data quality assurance and control in MRA.Candidate factors were identified from published reports of MRA. Content validity of the top candidate factors was assessed via a four-round two-group Delphi process with expert abstractors with experience in clinical research, registries, and quality improvement. The resulting coded factors were categorized into a control theory-based framework of MRA. Coverage of the framework was evaluated using the recent published literature.Analysis of the identified articles yielded 292 unique factors that affect the accuracy of abstracted data. Delphi processes overall refuted three of the top factors identified from the literature based on importance and five based on reliability (six total factors refuted). Four new factors were identified by the Delphi. The generated framework demonstrated comprehensive coverage. Significant underreporting of MRA methodology in recent studies was discovered.The framework generated from this research provides a guide for planning data quality assurance and control for studies using MRA. The large number and variability of factors indicate that while prospective quality assurance likely increases the accuracy of abstracted data, monitoring the accuracy during the abstraction process is also required. Recent studies reporting research results based on MRA rarely reported data quality assurance or control measures, and even less frequently reported data quality metrics with research results. Given the demonstrated variability, these methods and measures should be reported with research results.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4615628?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Meredith N Zozus
Carl Pieper
Constance M Johnson
Todd R Johnson
Amy Franklin
Jack Smith
Jiajie Zhang
spellingShingle Meredith N Zozus
Carl Pieper
Constance M Johnson
Todd R Johnson
Amy Franklin
Jack Smith
Jiajie Zhang
Factors Affecting Accuracy of Data Abstracted from Medical Records.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Meredith N Zozus
Carl Pieper
Constance M Johnson
Todd R Johnson
Amy Franklin
Jack Smith
Jiajie Zhang
author_sort Meredith N Zozus
title Factors Affecting Accuracy of Data Abstracted from Medical Records.
title_short Factors Affecting Accuracy of Data Abstracted from Medical Records.
title_full Factors Affecting Accuracy of Data Abstracted from Medical Records.
title_fullStr Factors Affecting Accuracy of Data Abstracted from Medical Records.
title_full_unstemmed Factors Affecting Accuracy of Data Abstracted from Medical Records.
title_sort factors affecting accuracy of data abstracted from medical records.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2015-01-01
description Medical record abstraction (MRA) is often cited as a significant source of error in research data, yet MRA methodology has rarely been the subject of investigation. Lack of a common framework has hindered application of the extant literature in practice, and, until now, there were no evidence-based guidelines for ensuring data quality in MRA. We aimed to identify the factors affecting the accuracy of data abstracted from medical records and to generate a framework for data quality assurance and control in MRA.Candidate factors were identified from published reports of MRA. Content validity of the top candidate factors was assessed via a four-round two-group Delphi process with expert abstractors with experience in clinical research, registries, and quality improvement. The resulting coded factors were categorized into a control theory-based framework of MRA. Coverage of the framework was evaluated using the recent published literature.Analysis of the identified articles yielded 292 unique factors that affect the accuracy of abstracted data. Delphi processes overall refuted three of the top factors identified from the literature based on importance and five based on reliability (six total factors refuted). Four new factors were identified by the Delphi. The generated framework demonstrated comprehensive coverage. Significant underreporting of MRA methodology in recent studies was discovered.The framework generated from this research provides a guide for planning data quality assurance and control for studies using MRA. The large number and variability of factors indicate that while prospective quality assurance likely increases the accuracy of abstracted data, monitoring the accuracy during the abstraction process is also required. Recent studies reporting research results based on MRA rarely reported data quality assurance or control measures, and even less frequently reported data quality metrics with research results. Given the demonstrated variability, these methods and measures should be reported with research results.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4615628?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT meredithnzozus factorsaffectingaccuracyofdataabstractedfrommedicalrecords
AT carlpieper factorsaffectingaccuracyofdataabstractedfrommedicalrecords
AT constancemjohnson factorsaffectingaccuracyofdataabstractedfrommedicalrecords
AT toddrjohnson factorsaffectingaccuracyofdataabstractedfrommedicalrecords
AT amyfranklin factorsaffectingaccuracyofdataabstractedfrommedicalrecords
AT jacksmith factorsaffectingaccuracyofdataabstractedfrommedicalrecords
AT jiajiezhang factorsaffectingaccuracyofdataabstractedfrommedicalrecords
_version_ 1725798262715187200