Hinds Aynslie, Lix Lisa M, Smith Mark, Quan Hude, Sanmartin Claudia
Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, S113-750 Bannatyne Avenue, Winnipeg, MB, R3E 0W3, Canada.
Manitoba Centre for Health Policy, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Can J Public Health. 2016 Jun 27;107(1):e56-e61. doi: 10.17269/cjph.107.5244.
Administrative health databases are increasingly used to conduct population-based health research and surveillance; this has resulted in a corresponding growth in studies about their quality. Our objective was to describe the characteristics of published Canadian studies about administrative health database quality.
PubMed, Scopus, and Google Advanced were searched, along with websites of relevant organizations. English-language studies that evaluated the quality of one or more Canadian administrative health databases between 2004 and 2014 were selected for inclusion. Extracted information included data quality concepts and measures, year and type of publication, type of database, and geographic origin.
More than 3,000 publications were identified fromthe search. Twelve reports and 144 peer-reviewed papers were included. The majority (53.5%) of peer-review publications used databases from Ontario and Alberta, while 67% of the non-peer-review publications used data from multiple provinces/ territories. Almost all peer-reviewed papers (97.2%) were validation studies. Hospital discharge abstracts and physician billing claims were the most frequently validated databases. Approximately half of the publications (53.0%) validated case definitions and 37.7% focused on a chronic physical health condition.
Gaps in the Canadian administrative data quality literature include a limited number of studies evaluating data from the Maritimes and across multiple jurisdictions, newer data sources, validating methods for identifying individuals with mental illness, and assessing the completeness and serviceability of the data. Data quality studies can aid researchers to understand the strengths and limitations of the data.
行政卫生数据库越来越多地用于开展基于人群的健康研究和监测;这导致了关于其质量的研究相应增加。我们的目的是描述已发表的关于加拿大行政卫生数据库质量的研究的特征。
检索了PubMed、Scopus和谷歌高级搜索,以及相关组织的网站。纳入了2004年至2014年间评估一个或多个加拿大行政卫生数据库质量的英文研究。提取的信息包括数据质量概念和测量方法、发表年份和类型、数据库类型以及地理来源。
通过检索识别出3000多篇出版物。纳入了12份报告和144篇同行评审论文。大多数(53.5%)同行评审出版物使用了安大略省和艾伯塔省的数据库,而非同行评审出版物中有67%使用了多个省/地区的数据。几乎所有同行评审论文(97.2%)都是验证研究。医院出院摘要和医生计费索赔是最常被验证的数据库。大约一半的出版物(53.0%)验证了病例定义,37.7%关注慢性身体健康状况。
加拿大行政数据质量文献中的差距包括评估来自海洋省份和多个司法管辖区的数据、新数据源、识别精神疾病患者的验证方法以及评估数据的完整性和可用性的研究数量有限。数据质量研究可以帮助研究人员了解数据的优势和局限性。