Assembling and validating data from multiple sources to study care for Veterans with bladder cancer

• Main Authors: Florian R. Schroeck, Brenda Sirovich, John D. Seigne, Douglas J. Robertson, Philip P. Goodney
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2017-09-01
• Series: BMC Urology
• Subjects: Bladder cancer; Cystoscopy; Electronic health record; Validity
• Online Access: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12894-017-0271-x

Abstract Background Despite the high prevalence of bladder cancer, research on optimal bladder cancer care is limited. One way to advance observational research on care is to use linked data from multiple sources. Such big data research can provide real-world details of care and outcomes across a large number of patients. We assembled and validated such data including (1) administrative data from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), (2) Medicare claims, (3) data abstracted by tumor registrars, (4) data abstracted via chart review from the national electronic health record, and (5) full text pathology reports. Methods Based on these combined data, we used administrative data to identify patients with newly diagnosed bladder cancer who received care in the VA. To validate these data, we first compared the diagnosis date from the administrative data to that from the tumor registry. Second, we measured accuracy of identifying bladder cancer care in VA administrative data, using a random chart review (n = 100) as gold standard. Lastly, we compared the proportion of patients who received bladder cancer care among those who did versus did not have full text bladder pathology reports available, expecting that those with reports are significantly more likely to receive care in VA. Results Out of 26,675 patients, 11,323 (42%) had tumor registry data available. 90% of these patients had a difference of 90 days or less between the diagnosis dates from administrative and registry data. Among 100 patients selected for chart review, 59 received bladder cancer care in VA, 58 of which were correctly identified using administrative data (sensitivity 98%, specificity 90%). Receipt of bladder cancer care was substantially more common among those who did versus did not have bladder pathology available (96% vs. 43%, p < 0.001). Conclusion Merging administrative with electronic health record and pathology data offers new possibilities to validate the use of administrative data in bladder cancer research.