Concordance between survey and electronic health record data in the COVID-19 Citizen Science study: a retrospective cohort analysis (Preprint)

Author:

Crull Elizabeth,O'Brien Emily C.,Antiperovitch Pavel,Asfaw Kirubel,Beatty Alexis L.ORCID,Djibo Djeneba Audrey,Kaul Alan F.,Kornak John,Marcus Gregory M.ORCID,Modrow Madelaine Faulkner,Olgin Jeffrey E.ORCID,Orozco Jaime,Park Soo,Peyser Noah,Pletcher Mark J.ORCID,Carton Thomas W.ORCID

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Real-world data reported by patients and extracted from electronic health records is increasingly leveraged for research, policy, and clinical decision-making. However, it is not always obvious the extent to which these two data sources agree with each other.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the concordance of variables reported by participants enrolled in an electronic cohort study and data available in their electronic health records.

METHODS

Survey data from COVID-19 Citizen Science, an electronic cohort study, were linked to electronic health record data from 7 health systems, comprising 34,908 participants. Concordance was evaluated for demographics, chronic conditions, and COVID-19 characteristics. Overall agreement, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and κ statistics with 95% CIs were calculated.

RESULTS

Of 34,017 participants with complete information, 62.3% were female, and the median age was 57 (IQR, 42-68). Agreement (κ) was high for sex (κ = 0.99) and Black (κ = 0.94), AAPI (κ = 0.93), and White (κ = 0.87) race and ethnicity but only moderate (κ = 0.54) for smoking status. Compared with chart data, participant report of chronic conditions had lower sensitivity and higher specificity, with widely varying levels of agreement (κ). Compared with participant report of COVID-19, electronic health record data had low sensitivity (32.2%) but higher specificity (95.8%). COVID-19 vaccination was the least concordant event (κ = 0.05) but had moderate sensitivity (49.7%) and high sensitivity (98.2%) compared to participant reports.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that additional work is required to integrate and prioritize participant-reported data in pragmatic research.

CLINICALTRIAL

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT5548803

Publisher

JMIR Publications Inc.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3