BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The quality and integrity of information is pivotal to the validity and reliability of inferences drawn in research. The aim of this study is to demonstrate that standardized medical records can be used as a data abstraction training tool and a quality control measure to assess the validity of medical record data abstraction. METHODS: Sixteen hospitals participating in a large multicenter study completed standardized data abstraction forms for three representative patient charts, one in each of the clinical areas of postoperative critical care and trauma, cardiac surgery, and repair of hip fracture. The completed forms were then compared to an established gold standard. RESULTS: The mean level of accuracy of the completed data abstraction forms in each of the above three clinical areas were 91.8, 77.5, and 91.5%, respectively. Missing data accounted for 19% of all discrepancies between the abstracted information and the gold standard. If queries and amendments were made by the study's coordinating center, the mean level of accuracy increased to 94.5, 82.5, and 92.9%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The present study stressed the need for quality control measures in abstracting information from medical records to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the data abstracted.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The quality and integrity of information is pivotal to the validity and reliability of inferences drawn in research. The aim of this study is to demonstrate that standardized medical records can be used as a data abstraction training tool and a quality control measure to assess the validity of medical record data abstraction. METHODS: Sixteen hospitals participating in a large multicenter study completed standardized data abstraction forms for three representative patient charts, one in each of the clinical areas of postoperative critical care and trauma, cardiac surgery, and repair of hip fracture. The completed forms were then compared to an established gold standard. RESULTS: The mean level of accuracy of the completed data abstraction forms in each of the above three clinical areas were 91.8, 77.5, and 91.5%, respectively. Missing data accounted for 19% of all discrepancies between the abstracted information and the gold standard. If queries and amendments were made by the study's coordinating center, the mean level of accuracy increased to 94.5, 82.5, and 92.9%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The present study stressed the need for quality control measures in abstracting information from medical records to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the data abstracted.
Authors: Jill Mohr; Gregory J Strnad; Lutul Farrow; Kate Heinlein; Carolyn M Hettrich; Morgan H Jones; Anthony Miniaci; Eric Ricchetti; James Rosneck; Mark Schickendantz; Paul Saluan; Jose F Vega; Kurt P Spindler Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2019-10-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Joseph Featherall; Sameer R Oak; Gregory J Strnad; Lutul D Farrow; Morgan H Jones; Anthony A Miniaci; Richard D Parker; James T Rosneck; Paul M Saluan; Kurt P Spindler Journal: J Am Acad Orthop Surg Date: 2019-07-22 Impact factor: 3.020
Authors: Sari L Reisner; Matthew J Mimiaga; Patricia Case; Chris Grasso; Casey T O'Brien; Padmini Harigopal; Margie Skeer; Kenneth H Mayer Journal: Sex Transm Dis Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Sambit Sahoo; Jill Mohr; Gregory J Strnad; Jose Vega; Morgan Jones; Mark S Schickendantz; Lutul Farrow; Kurt P Spindler; Joseph P Iannotti; Eric T Ricchetti; Kathleen A Derwin Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2019-05-02 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Noor Beckwith; Michal J McDowell; Sari L Reisner; Shayne Zaslow; Roger D Weiss; Kenneth H Mayer; Alex S Keuroghlian Journal: LGBT Health Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 4.151
Authors: Brock Polnaszek; Andrea Gilmore-Bykovskyi; Melissa Hovanes; Rachel Roiland; Patrick Ferguson; Roger Brown; Amy J H Kind Journal: Med Care Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 2.983