Manitoba and Saskatchewan administrative health care utilization databases are used differently to answer epidemiologic research questions.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the use of two Canadian provincial databases by a systematic review of published studies that used them as a primary data source to answer epidemiologic and health services research questions.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

PubMed, EMBASE, BIOSIS, and CINAHL (keywords: "Manitoba" 1970-2004 and "Saskatchewan" 1969-2004) and the web sites of the provincial data custodians were searched to address our objective. Broad screening of citations and data abstraction were performed using a predefined collection form. Information on study characteristics, therapeutic areas studied, databases used, authors' affiliation, and issues related to data validity was recorded.

RESULTS

Three thousand nine hundred and forty-nine citations were screened, 610 studies retrieved, and 325 included. In Saskatchewan, the principal research type was assessment of exposures and health outcomes (48.2%) with 50.4% using a cohort or case-control design, whereas, in Manitoba, it was health services utilization (47.8%) and 86.6% were descriptive. Local investigators performed 83.3% of the Manitoba studies, compared with 35.5% of the Saskatchewan studies. Only 6.2% of the studies assessed the validity and reliability of the database for research purposes and few incorporated relevant information about the validity of their diagnostic data.

CONCLUSION

Important differences exist in the administration and use of these databases. Similar systematic evidence synthesis should be conducted on other databases.