Prevalence estimation by joint use of big data and health survey: a demonstration study using electronic health records in New York city
Abstract Background Electronic Health Records (EHR) has been increasingly used as a tool to monitor population health. However, subject-level errors in the records can yield biased estimates of health indicators. There is an urgent need for methods to estimate the prevalence of health indicators usi...
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2020-04-01
|
Series: | BMC Medical Research Methodology |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-020-00956-6 |
id |
doaj-5a47df556a87421eb221b29f21e624e3 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-5a47df556a87421eb221b29f21e624e32020-11-25T02:58:38ZengBMCBMC Medical Research Methodology1471-22882020-04-0120111010.1186/s12874-020-00956-6Prevalence estimation by joint use of big data and health survey: a demonstration study using electronic health records in New York cityRyung S. Kim0Viswanathan Shankar1Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of MedicineDepartment of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of MedicineAbstract Background Electronic Health Records (EHR) has been increasingly used as a tool to monitor population health. However, subject-level errors in the records can yield biased estimates of health indicators. There is an urgent need for methods to estimate the prevalence of health indicators using large and real-time EHR while correcting the potential bias. Methods We demonstrate joint analyses of EHR and a smaller gold-standard health survey. We first adopted Mosteller’s method that pools two estimators, among which one is potentially biased. It only requires knowing the prevalence estimates from two data sources and their standard errors. Then, we adopted the method of Schenker et al., which uses multiple imputations of subject-level health outcomes that are missing for the subjects in EHR. This procedure requires information to link some subjects between two sources and modeling the mechanism of misclassification in EHR as well as modeling inclusion probabilities to both sources. Results In a simulation study, both estimators yielded negligible bias even when EHR was biased. They performed as well as health survey estimator when EHR bias was large and better than health survey estimator when EHR bias was moderate. It may be challenging to model the misclassification mechanism in real data for the subject-level imputation estimator. We illustrated the methods analyzing six health indicators from 2013 to 14 NYC HANES and the 2013 NYC Macroscope, and a study that linked some subjects in both data sources. Conclusions When a small gold-standard health survey exists, it can serve as a safeguard against potential bias in EHR through the joint analysis of the two sources.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-020-00956-6Big dataElectronic health recordsMultiple imputationsMeasurement errorSelection biasPopulation health surveillance |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Ryung S. Kim Viswanathan Shankar |
spellingShingle |
Ryung S. Kim Viswanathan Shankar Prevalence estimation by joint use of big data and health survey: a demonstration study using electronic health records in New York city BMC Medical Research Methodology Big data Electronic health records Multiple imputations Measurement error Selection bias Population health surveillance |
author_facet |
Ryung S. Kim Viswanathan Shankar |
author_sort |
Ryung S. Kim |
title |
Prevalence estimation by joint use of big data and health survey: a demonstration study using electronic health records in New York city |
title_short |
Prevalence estimation by joint use of big data and health survey: a demonstration study using electronic health records in New York city |
title_full |
Prevalence estimation by joint use of big data and health survey: a demonstration study using electronic health records in New York city |
title_fullStr |
Prevalence estimation by joint use of big data and health survey: a demonstration study using electronic health records in New York city |
title_full_unstemmed |
Prevalence estimation by joint use of big data and health survey: a demonstration study using electronic health records in New York city |
title_sort |
prevalence estimation by joint use of big data and health survey: a demonstration study using electronic health records in new york city |
publisher |
BMC |
series |
BMC Medical Research Methodology |
issn |
1471-2288 |
publishDate |
2020-04-01 |
description |
Abstract Background Electronic Health Records (EHR) has been increasingly used as a tool to monitor population health. However, subject-level errors in the records can yield biased estimates of health indicators. There is an urgent need for methods to estimate the prevalence of health indicators using large and real-time EHR while correcting the potential bias. Methods We demonstrate joint analyses of EHR and a smaller gold-standard health survey. We first adopted Mosteller’s method that pools two estimators, among which one is potentially biased. It only requires knowing the prevalence estimates from two data sources and their standard errors. Then, we adopted the method of Schenker et al., which uses multiple imputations of subject-level health outcomes that are missing for the subjects in EHR. This procedure requires information to link some subjects between two sources and modeling the mechanism of misclassification in EHR as well as modeling inclusion probabilities to both sources. Results In a simulation study, both estimators yielded negligible bias even when EHR was biased. They performed as well as health survey estimator when EHR bias was large and better than health survey estimator when EHR bias was moderate. It may be challenging to model the misclassification mechanism in real data for the subject-level imputation estimator. We illustrated the methods analyzing six health indicators from 2013 to 14 NYC HANES and the 2013 NYC Macroscope, and a study that linked some subjects in both data sources. Conclusions When a small gold-standard health survey exists, it can serve as a safeguard against potential bias in EHR through the joint analysis of the two sources. |
topic |
Big data Electronic health records Multiple imputations Measurement error Selection bias Population health surveillance |
url |
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-020-00956-6 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT ryungskim prevalenceestimationbyjointuseofbigdataandhealthsurveyademonstrationstudyusingelectronichealthrecordsinnewyorkcity AT viswanathanshankar prevalenceestimationbyjointuseofbigdataandhealthsurveyademonstrationstudyusingelectronichealthrecordsinnewyorkcity |
_version_ |
1724705867866046464 |