青光眼电子健康记录数据的报告质量：系统性文献综述。

IF 2.8 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY

Ophthalmology. Glaucoma Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ogla.2024.04.002

{"title":"青光眼电子健康记录数据的报告质量：系统性文献综述。","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ogla.2024.04.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Topic</h3><div>Assessing reporting standards in glaucoma studies utilizing electronic health records (EHR).</div></div><div><h3>Clinical Relevance</h3><div>Glaucoma's significance, underscored by its status as a leading cause of irreversible blindness worldwide, necessitates reliable research findings. This study evaluates adherence to the CODE-EHR best-practice framework in glaucoma studies using EHR, aiming to improve clinical care and patient outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic review, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (PROSPERO CRD42023430025), identified relevant studies (January 2022–May 2023) in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Eligible studies, using EHR data from clinical institutions for glaucoma research, were assessed for study design, participant characteristics, EHR data, and sources. Quality appraisal used the CODE-EHR best-practice framework, focusing on data construction, linkage, fitness for purpose, disease and outcome definitions, analysis, and ethics and governance.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of 31 identified studies, predominant EHR sources were hospitals and clinical warehouses. Commonly reported elements included age, gender, glaucoma diagnosis, and intraocular pressure. Only 16% fully adhered to CODE-EHR best-practice framework's minimum standards, with none meeting preferred standards. While statistical analysis and ethical considerations were relatively well-addressed, areas such as EHR data management and study design showed room for improvement. Patient and public involvement, and acknowledgment of data linkage processes, data security, and storage reporting were often missed.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Adherence to CODE-EHR best-practice framework's standards in EHR-based studies of glaucoma can be improved upon. Standardized reporting of EHR data are essential to ensure the reliability of research, facilitating its translation into clinical practice and improving healthcare decision-making for better patient outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Financial Disclosure(s)</h3><div>Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":19519,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology. Glaucoma","volume":"7 5","pages":"Pages 422-430"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589419624000644/pdfft?md5=01bb52e638af196f1ad6623b8bf24ae5&pid=1-s2.0-S2589419624000644-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality of Reporting Electronic Health Record Data in Glaucoma\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ogla.2024.04.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Topic</h3><div>Assessing reporting standards in glaucoma studies utilizing electronic health records (EHR).</div></div><div><h3>Clinical Relevance</h3><div>Glaucoma's significance, underscored by its status as a leading cause of irreversible blindness worldwide, necessitates reliable research findings. This study evaluates adherence to the CODE-EHR best-practice framework in glaucoma studies using EHR, aiming to improve clinical care and patient outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic review, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (PROSPERO CRD42023430025), identified relevant studies (January 2022–May 2023) in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Eligible studies, using EHR data from clinical institutions for glaucoma research, were assessed for study design, participant characteristics, EHR data, and sources. Quality appraisal used the CODE-EHR best-practice framework, focusing on data construction, linkage, fitness for purpose, disease and outcome definitions, analysis, and ethics and governance.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of 31 identified studies, predominant EHR sources were hospitals and clinical warehouses. Commonly reported elements included age, gender, glaucoma diagnosis, and intraocular pressure. Only 16% fully adhered to CODE-EHR best-practice framework's minimum standards, with none meeting preferred standards. While statistical analysis and ethical considerations were relatively well-addressed, areas such as EHR data management and study design showed room for improvement. Patient and public involvement, and acknowledgment of data linkage processes, data security, and storage reporting were often missed.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Adherence to CODE-EHR best-practice framework's standards in EHR-based studies of glaucoma can be improved upon. Standardized reporting of EHR data are essential to ensure the reliability of research, facilitating its translation into clinical practice and improving healthcare decision-making for better patient outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Financial Disclosure(s)</h3><div>Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19519,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmology. Glaucoma\",\"volume\":\"7 5\",\"pages\":\"Pages 422-430\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589419624000644/pdfft?md5=01bb52e638af196f1ad6623b8bf24ae5&pid=1-s2.0-S2589419624000644-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmology. Glaucoma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589419624000644\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology. Glaucoma","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589419624000644","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

主题评估利用电子健康记录（EHR）进行的青光眼研究的报告标准.临床相关性青光眼是导致全球不可逆转性失明的主要原因，其重要性不言而喻，因此需要可靠的研究结果。本研究评估了在使用电子病历的青光眼研究中遵守 CODE-EHR 最佳实践框架的情况，旨在改善临床护理和患者预后。方法根据系统性综述和元分析首选报告项目（PRISMA）指南（PROSPERO CRD42023430025），在 MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL 和 Web of Science 中确定了相关研究（2022 年 1 月至 2023 年 5 月）。符合条件的研究使用了青光眼研究临床机构的电子病历数据，并对研究设计、参与者特征、电子病历数据和来源进行了评估。质量评估采用 CODE-EHR 最佳实践框架，重点关注数据构建、链接、目的适宜性、疾病和结果定义、分析以及伦理和管理。常见的报告要素包括年龄、性别、青光眼诊断和眼压。只有 16% 的研究完全符合 CODE-EHR 最佳实践框架的最低标准，没有一项研究符合首选标准。虽然统计分析和伦理方面的考虑相对较好，但电子病历数据管理和研究设计等方面仍有改进的余地。结论在基于电子病历的青光眼研究中遵守 CODE-EHR 最佳实践框架的标准还有待改进。电子病历数据的标准化报告对于确保研究的可靠性、促进研究成果转化为临床实践以及改善医疗决策以提高患者疗效至关重要。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Quality of Reporting Electronic Health Record Data in Glaucoma

Topic

Assessing reporting standards in glaucoma studies utilizing electronic health records (EHR).

Clinical Relevance

Glaucoma's significance, underscored by its status as a leading cause of irreversible blindness worldwide, necessitates reliable research findings. This study evaluates adherence to the CODE-EHR best-practice framework in glaucoma studies using EHR, aiming to improve clinical care and patient outcomes.

Methods

A systematic review, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (PROSPERO CRD42023430025), identified relevant studies (January 2022–May 2023) in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Eligible studies, using EHR data from clinical institutions for glaucoma research, were assessed for study design, participant characteristics, EHR data, and sources. Quality appraisal used the CODE-EHR best-practice framework, focusing on data construction, linkage, fitness for purpose, disease and outcome definitions, analysis, and ethics and governance.

Results

Of 31 identified studies, predominant EHR sources were hospitals and clinical warehouses. Commonly reported elements included age, gender, glaucoma diagnosis, and intraocular pressure. Only 16% fully adhered to CODE-EHR best-practice framework's minimum standards, with none meeting preferred standards. While statistical analysis and ethical considerations were relatively well-addressed, areas such as EHR data management and study design showed room for improvement. Patient and public involvement, and acknowledgment of data linkage processes, data security, and storage reporting were often missed.

Conclusion

Adherence to CODE-EHR best-practice framework's standards in EHR-based studies of glaucoma can be improved upon. Standardized reporting of EHR data are essential to ensure the reliability of research, facilitating its translation into clinical practice and improving healthcare decision-making for better patient outcomes.