Info-tsunami: surviving the storm with data quality probes
Open accessAbstract
As a result of the rapid expansion of electronically available clinical knowledge, clinicians are faced with potential information overload (info-tsunami). The use of data quality probes (DQPs) in primary care can encourage clinicians' awareness of, and improvement in, data quality entry over time. DQPs can also highlight areas of potential error or omission as well as good practice, which can impact directly upon the quality of patient care. In this paper, five specific conditions have been subjected to the use of a series of DQPs over a five-year period in order to assess and measure the performance of different initiatives on the quality of data capture and patient care.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Brown and Warmington's data quality probes could be extended to various data elements, although they require detailed clinical knowledge to implement.
“Brown and Warmington's66 67 data quality probes, for example, could be extended to various data elements, although they require detailed clinical knowledge to implement.”
From Methods and dimensions of electronic health record data quality assessment: enabling reuse for clinical research (2013) · cites this paper as [67]
Cites
Brown, P. (2002) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/s1386-5056(02)00068-0 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Weiskopf, N. G., & Weng, C. (2013) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000681 · Cited by 1,216 · see citing works
A Data Quality Assessment Guideline for Electronic Health Record Data Reuse
Weiskopf, N. G., Bakken, S., Hripcsak, G., & Weng, C. (2017) · eGEMs (Generating Evidence & Methods to improve patient outcomes) · doi:10.5334/egems.218 · Cited by 152 · see citing works
De Lusignan, S., Khunti, K., Belsey, J., Hattersley, A., Van Vlymen, J., Gallagher, H., Millett, C., Hague, N. J., Tomson, C., Harris, K., et al. (2010) · Diabetic Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1464-5491.2009.02917.x · Cited by 122 · see citing works
- Authors
- Brown, P., & Warmington, V.
- Affiliations
- University of East Anglia (GB)
- ORCID
- Brown, Philip
- Venue
- Journal of Innovation in Health Informatics
- Publisher
- Portico
- Published
- 2003-12-01
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 229-237
- ISSN
- 1475-9985 (ISSN-L)
- 2058-4555
- OpenAlex
- W2155430454
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doaj.org
- Licence
- cc-by-sa
- Locations
- Journal of Innovation in Health Informatics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Journal of Innovation in Health Informatics (BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT) (submittedVersion)
- UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Data Quality and Management
- Keywords
- information overload, electronic health records, data quality, primary care, clinical data entry, quality of care, clinical decision support, data capture
- MeSH terms
- Asthma, Coronary Disease, Diabetes Mellitus, England, Humans, Information Systems, Ischemia, Medical History Taking, Physician-Patient Relations, Primary Health Care, Research Design, Medical Records Systems, Computerized, Total Quality Management
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
