...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Health Services Research >Field methods in medical record abstraction: assessing the properties of comparative effectiveness estimates
【24h】

Field methods in medical record abstraction: assessing the properties of comparative effectiveness estimates

机译:病历提取中的现场方法:评估比较有效性评估的属性

获取原文
           

摘要

Background Comparative effectiveness studies using Medicare claims data are vulnerable to treatment selection biases and supplemental data from a sample of patients has been recommended for examining the magnitude of this bias. Previous research using nationwide Medicare claims data has typically relied on the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS) for supplemental data. Because many important clinical variables for our specific research question are not available in the MCBS, we collected medical record data from a subsample of patients to assess the validity of assumptions and to aid in the interpretation of our estimates. This paper seeks to describe and document the process used to collect and validate this supplemental information. Methods Medicare claims data files for all patients with fee-for-service Medicare benefits who had an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in 2007 or 2008 were obtained. Medical records were obtained and abstracted for a stratified subsample of 1,601 of these patients, using strata defined by claims-based measures of physician prescribing practices and drug treatment combinations. The abstraction tool was developed collaboratively by study clinicians and researchers, leveraging important elements from previously validated tools. Results Records for 2,707 AMI patients were requested from the admitting hospitals and 1,751 were received for an overall response rate of 65%; 1,601 cases were abstracted by trained personnel at a contracted firm. Data were collected with overall 96% inter-abstractor agreement across all variables. Some non-response bias was detected at the patient and facility level. Conclusion Although Medicare claims data are a potentially powerful resource for conducting comparative effectiveness analyses, observational databases are vulnerable to treatment selection biases. This study demonstrates that it is feasible to medical records for Medicare patients nationwide and collect high quality data, to design the sampling purposively to address specific research questions, and to more thoroughly evaluate the appropriateness of care delivered to AMI patients.
机译:背景技术使用Medicare索赔数据进行的比较有效性研究容易受到治疗选择偏倚的影响,因此建议从患者样本中获取补充数据以检查这种偏倚的程度。以前使用全国性Medicare索赔数据进行的研究通常依赖Medicare当前受益人调查(MCBS)来获取补充数据。由于MCBS中没有针对我们的特定研究问题的许多重要临床变量,因此我们从患者子样本中收集了病历数据,以评估假设的有效性并有助于我们估算的解释。本文旨在描述和记录用于收集和验证此补充信息的过程。方法获得了2007年或2008年患有急性心肌梗死(AMI)的所有具有按需付费医疗保险福利的患者的Medicare索赔数据文件。获得了这些患者的医疗记录,并对其中的1,601例患者的分层子样本进行了提取,使用的是根据医师开处方的做法和药物治疗组合确定的基于声明的衡量标准。抽象工具是由研究临床医生和研究人员合作开发的,利用了先前经过验证的工具中的重要元素。结果入院医院要求记录2707例AMI患者,记录1751例,总缓解率为65%。一家承包公司的训练有素的人员提取了1,601起案件。所有变量之间的整体摘要间同意率为96%,收集了数据。在患者和机构级别检测到一些无响应偏差。结论尽管Medicare索赔数据是进行比较有效性分析的潜在强大资源,但观察数据库易受治疗选择偏见的影响。这项研究表明,在全国范围内为Medicare患者提供病历并收集高质量数据,有针对性地设计采样以解决特定的研究问题,并更彻底地评估为AMI患者提供护理的适当性是可行的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号