Literature DB >> 14532366

Directory of clinical databases: improving and promoting their use.

N Black1, M Payne.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The controversy surrounding the actual and potential use of clinical databases partly reflects the huge variation in their content and quality. In addition, use of existing clinical databases is severely limited by a lack of knowledge of their availability.
OBJECTIVES: To develop and test a standardised method for assessing the quality (completeness and accuracy) of clinical databases and to establish a web based directory of databases in the UK.
METHODS: An expert group was set up (1). to establish the criteria for inclusion of databases; (2). to develop a quality assessment instrument with high content validity, based on epidemiological theory; (3). to test empirically, modify, and retest the acceptability to database custodians, face validity and floor/ceiling effects; and (4). to design a website.
RESULTS: Criteria for inclusion of databases were the provision of individual level data; inclusion in the database defined by a common circumstance (e.g. condition, treatment), an administrative arrangement, or an adverse outcome; and inclusion of data from more than one provider. A quality assessment instrument consisting of 10 items (four on coverage, six on reliability and validity) was developed and shown to have good face and content validity, no floor/ceiling effects, and to be acceptable to database custodians. A website (www.docdat.org) was developed. Indications over the first 18 months (number of visitors to the site) are that it is increasingly popular. By November 2002 there were around 3500 hits a month.
CONCLUSIONS: A website now exists where visitors can identify clinical databases in the UK that may be suitable to meet their aims. It is planned both to develop a local version for use within a hospital and to encourage similar national systems in other countries.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14532366      PMCID: PMC1743755          DOI: 10.1136/qhc.12.5.348

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care        ISSN: 1475-3898


  6 in total

Review 1.  The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials.

Authors:  D Moher; K F Schulz; D Altman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-04-18       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Consequences of discharges from intensive care at night.

Authors:  C Goldfrad; K Rowan
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2000-04-01       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  High-quality clinical databases: breaking down barriers.

Authors:  N Black
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1999-04-10       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Explaining differences in English hospital death rates using routinely collected data.

Authors:  B Jarman; S Gault; B Alves; A Hider; S Dolan; A Cook; B Hurwitz; L I Iezzoni
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-06-05

Review 5.  Clinical data bases. Accomplishments and unrealized potential.

Authors:  D B Pryor; R M Califf; F E Harrell; M A Hlatky; K L Lee; D B Mark; R A Rosati
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1985-05       Impact factor: 2.983

Review 6.  Registry evaluation methods: a review and case study.

Authors:  J Goldberg; H M Gelfand; P S Levy
Journal:  Epidemiol Rev       Date:  1980       Impact factor: 6.222

  6 in total
  22 in total

1.  Hospitals' star ratings and clinical outcomes: ecological study.

Authors:  Kathy Rowan; David Harrison; Anthony Brady; Nick Black
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-01-23

2.  Cross sectional survey of multicentre clinical databases in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  Nick Black; Marian Barker; Mary Payne
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-06-19

3.  Effect of hospital ownership status and payment structure on the adoption and use of drug-eluting stents for percutaneous coronary interventions.

Authors:  Roberto Grilli; Paolo Guastaroba; Francesco Taroni
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2006-12-19       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 4.  Systematic review and evaluation of physiological track and trigger warning systems for identifying at-risk patients on the ward.

Authors:  Haiyan Gao; Ann McDonnell; David A Harrison; Tracey Moore; Sheila Adam; Kathleen Daly; Lisa Esmonde; David R Goldhill; Gareth J Parry; Arash Rashidian; Christian P Subbe; Sheila Harvey
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2007-02-22       Impact factor: 17.440

5.  Maximising research opportunities of new NHS information systems.

Authors:  Nick Black
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-01-19

6.  Is research from databases reliable? Not sure.

Authors:  Meri R J Varkila; Olaf L Cremer
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2018-12-14       Impact factor: 17.440

7.  SAPS II revisited.

Authors:  Philippe Aegerter; Ariane Boumendil; Aurélia Retbi; Etienne Minvielle; Benoit Dervaux; Bertrand Guidet
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2005-01-28       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 8.  Dementia registries around the globe and their applications: A systematic review.

Authors:  Karolina Krysinska; Perminder S Sachdev; John Breitner; Miia Kivipelto; Walter Kukull; Henry Brodaty
Journal:  Alzheimers Dement       Date:  2017-05-30       Impact factor: 21.566

Review 9.  Using existing data to address important clinical questions in critical care.

Authors:  Colin R Cooke; Theodore J Iwashyna
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 7.598

10.  Data linkage: a powerful research tool with potential problems.

Authors:  Megan A Bohensky; Damien Jolley; Vijaya Sundararajan; Sue Evans; David V Pilcher; Ian Scott; Caroline A Brand
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2010-12-22       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.