Literature DB >> 27852603

Controlling for Informed Presence Bias Due to the Number of Health Encounters in an Electronic Health Record.

Benjamin A Goldstein, Nrupen A Bhavsar, Matthew Phelan, Michael J Pencina.   

Abstract

Electronic health records (EHRs) are an increasingly utilized resource for clinical research. While their size allows for many analytical opportunities, as with most observational data there is also the potential for bias. One of the key sources of bias in EHRs is what we term informed presence-the notion that inclusion in an EHR is not random but rather indicates that the subject is ill, making people in EHRs systematically different from those not in EHRs. In this article, we use simulated and empirical data to illustrate the conditions under which such bias can arise and how conditioning on the number of health-care encounters can be one way to remove this bias. In doing so, we also show when such an approach can impart M bias, or bias from conditioning on a collider. Finally, we explore the conditions under which number of medical encounters can serve as a proxy for general health. We apply these methods to an EHR data set from a university medical center covering the years 2007-2013.
© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Berkson's bias; bias (epidemiology); confounding factors (epidemiology); electronic health records; epidemiologic methods

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27852603      PMCID: PMC5152663          DOI: 10.1093/aje/kww112

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0002-9262            Impact factor:   4.897


  14 in total

1.  Quantifying biases in causal models: classical confounding vs collider-stratification bias.

Authors:  Sander Greenland
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 4.822

2.  A comparison of phenotype definitions for diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Rachel L Richesson; Shelley A Rusincovitch; Douglas Wixted; Bryan C Batch; Mark N Feinglos; Marie Lynn Miranda; W Ed Hammond; Robert M Califf; Susan E Spratt
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2013-09-11       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  Assessing validity of ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data in recording clinical conditions in a unique dually coded database.

Authors:  Hude Quan; Bing Li; L Duncan Saunders; Gerry A Parsons; Carolyn I Nilsson; Arif Alibhai; William A Ghali
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  Implications of M bias in epidemiologic studies: a simulation study.

Authors:  Wei Liu; M Alan Brookhart; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Xiaojuan Mi; Soko Setoguchi
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2012-10-25       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation.

Authors:  M E Charlson; P Pompei; K L Ales; C R MacKenzie
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1987

6.  Berkson's bias, selection bias, and missing data.

Authors:  Daniel Westreich
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.822

7.  Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data.

Authors:  Hude Quan; Vijaya Sundararajan; Patricia Halfon; Andrew Fong; Bernard Burnand; Jean-Christophe Luthi; L Duncan Saunders; Cynthia A Beck; Thomas E Feasby; William A Ghali
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  Caveats for the use of operational electronic health record data in comparative effectiveness research.

Authors:  William R Hersh; Mark G Weiner; Peter J Embi; Judith R Logan; Philip R O Payne; Elmer V Bernstam; Harold P Lehmann; George Hripcsak; Timothy H Hartzog; James J Cimino; Joel H Saltz
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 2.983

9.  Commentary: Berkson's fallacy and missing data.

Authors:  Daniel Westreich; Rhian M Daniel
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2014-02-28       Impact factor: 7.196

10.  The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) statement.

Authors:  Eric I Benchimol; Liam Smeeth; Astrid Guttmann; Katie Harron; David Moher; Irene Petersen; Henrik T Sørensen; Erik von Elm; Sinéad M Langan
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2015-10-06       Impact factor: 11.069

View more
  44 in total

1.  Frailty Screening Using the Electronic Health Record Within a Medicare Accountable Care Organization.

Authors:  Nicholas M Pajewski; Kristin Lenoir; Brian J Wells; Jeff D Williamson; Kathryn E Callahan
Journal:  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci       Date:  2019-10-04       Impact factor: 6.053

Review 2.  Opportunities and challenges in developing risk prediction models with electronic health records data: a systematic review.

Authors:  Benjamin A Goldstein; Ann Marie Navar; Michael J Pencina; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2016-05-17       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  Inflammatory bowel disease and risk of Parkinson's disease in Medicare beneficiaries.

Authors:  Alejandra Camacho-Soto; Anat Gross; Susan Searles Nielsen; Neelendu Dey; Brad A Racette
Journal:  Parkinsonism Relat Disord       Date:  2018-02-09       Impact factor: 4.891

4.  Associations between Community-Acquired Pneumonia and Proton Pump Inhibitors in the Laryngeal/Voice-Disordered Population.

Authors:  Seth M Cohen; Hui-Jie Lee; David A Leiman; Nelson Roy; Stephanie Misono
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2018-11-13       Impact factor: 3.497

5.  How and when informative visit processes can bias inference when using electronic health records data for clinical research.

Authors:  Benjamin A Goldstein; Matthew Phelan; Neha J Pagidipati; Sarah B Peskoe
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 4.497

6.  The emerging landscape of health research based on biobanks linked to electronic health records: Existing resources, statistical challenges, and potential opportunities.

Authors:  Lauren J Beesley; Maxwell Salvatore; Lars G Fritsche; Anita Pandit; Arvind Rao; Chad Brummett; Cristen J Willer; Lynda D Lisabeth; Bhramar Mukherjee
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2019-12-20       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  A Population-Based Assessment of Depression and Anxiety in Patients With Brachial Plexus Injuries.

Authors:  Sarah M Yannascoli; Dustin Stwalley; Mohammed J Saeed; Margaret A Olsen; Christopher J Dy
Journal:  J Hand Surg Am       Date:  2018-05-19       Impact factor: 2.230

8.  A comparison of risk prediction methods using repeated observations: an application to electronic health records for hemodialysis.

Authors:  Benjamin A Goldstein; Gina Maria Pomann; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; Michael J Pencina
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2017-05-02       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Risk Factors for Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementia Diagnoses in American Indians.

Authors:  Cara L Carty; Carolyn Noonan; Clemma Muller; Don Saner; Eric M Reiman; Dedra Buchwald; Ronny A Bell; Lonnie A Nelson
Journal:  Ethn Dis       Date:  2020-09-24       Impact factor: 1.847

10.  β2-adrenoreceptor medications and risk of Parkinson disease.

Authors:  Susan Searles Nielsen; Anat Gross; Alejandra Camacho-Soto; Allison W Willis; Brad A Racette
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  2018-10-30       Impact factor: 10.422

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.