» Articles » PMID: 29930963

Illustrating Informed Presence Bias in Electronic Health Records Data: How Patient Interactions with a Health System Can Impact Inference

Overview
Journal EGEMS (Wash DC)
Publisher Ubiquity Press
Date 2018 Jun 23
PMID 29930963
Citations 40
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Electronic health record (EHR) data are becoming a primary resource for clinical research. Compared to traditional research data, such as those from clinical trials and epidemiologic cohorts, EHR data have a number of appealing characteristics. However, because they do not have mechanisms set in place to ensure that the appropriate data are collected, they also pose a number of analytic challenges. In this paper, we illustrate that how a patient interacts with a health system influences which data are recorded in the EHR. These interactions are typically informative, potentially resulting in bias. We term the overall set of induced biases To illustrate this, we use examples from EHR based analyses. Specifically, we show that: 1) Where a patient receives services within a health facility can induce 2) Which health system a patient chooses for an encounter can result in and 3) Referral encounters can create an While often times addressing these biases can be straightforward, it is important to understand how they are induced in any EHR based analysis.

Citing Articles

Functional principal component analysis with informative observation times.

Sang P, Kong D, Yang S Biometrika. 2025; 112(1):asae055.

PMID: 39877200 PMC: 11771518. DOI: 10.1093/biomet/asae055.


Reducing Information and Selection Bias in EHR-Linked Biobanks via Genetics-Informed Multiple Imputation and Sample Weighting.

Salvatore M, Kundu R, Du J, Friese C, Mondul A, Hanauer D medRxiv. 2024; .

PMID: 39574876 PMC: 11581092. DOI: 10.1101/2024.10.28.24316286.


Addressing Selection Biases within Electronic Health Record Data for Estimation of Diabetes Prevalence among New York City Young Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Conderino S, Thorpe L, Divers J, Albrecht S, Farley S, Lee D BMJ Public Health. 2024; 2(2).

PMID: 39568629 PMC: 11578099. DOI: 10.1136/bmjph-2024-001666.


Addressing Information Biases Within Electronic Health Record Data to Improve the Examination of Epidemiologic Associations With Diabetes Prevalence Among Young Adults: Cross-Sectional Study.

Conderino S, Anthopolos R, Albrecht S, Farley S, Divers J, Titus A JMIR Med Inform. 2024; 12:e58085.

PMID: 39353204 PMC: 11460830. DOI: 10.2196/58085.


An open-source framework for end-to-end analysis of electronic health record data.

Heumos L, Ehmele P, Treis T, Upmeier Zu Belzen J, Roellin E, May L Nat Med. 2024; 30(11):3369-3380.

PMID: 39266748 PMC: 11564094. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-024-03214-0.


References
1.
Haneuse S, Daniels M . A General Framework for Considering Selection Bias in EHR-Based Studies: What Data Are Observed and Why?. EGEMS (Wash DC). 2016; 4(1):1203. PMC: 5013936. DOI: 10.13063/2327-9214.1203. View

2.
Chiou S, Campbell C, Horswell R, Myers L, Culbertson R . Use of the emergency department for less-urgent care among type 2 diabetics under a disease management program. BMC Health Serv Res. 2009; 9:223. PMC: 2795752. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-9-223. View

3.
Richesson R, Rusincovitch S, Wixted D, Batch B, Feinglos M, Miranda M . A comparison of phenotype definitions for diabetes mellitus. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013; 20(e2):e319-26. PMC: 3861928. DOI: 10.1136/amiajnl-2013-001952. View

4.
Pivovarov R, Albers D, Sepulveda J, Elhadad N . Identifying and mitigating biases in EHR laboratory tests. J Biomed Inform. 2014; 51:24-34. PMC: 4194228. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2014.03.016. View

5.
Sagreiya H, Altman R . The utility of general purpose versus specialty clinical databases for research: warfarin dose estimation from extracted clinical variables. J Biomed Inform. 2010; 43(5):747-51. PMC: 2928873. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2010.03.014. View