Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021 Oct 27;21(1):234.
doi: 10.1186/s12874-021-01416-5.

A narrative review on the validity of electronic health record-based research in epidemiology

Milena A Gianfrancesco  1 , Neal D Goldstein  2
Affiliations
Review

A narrative review on the validity of electronic health record-based research in epidemiology

Milena A Gianfrancesco et al. BMC Med Res Methodol. .

Abstract

Electronic health records (EHRs) are widely used in epidemiological research, but the validity of the results is dependent upon the assumptions made about the healthcare system, the patient, and the provider. In this review, we identify four overarching challenges in using EHR-based data for epidemiological analysis, with a particular emphasis on threats to validity. These challenges include representativeness of the EHR to a target population, the availability and interpretability of clinical and non-clinical data, and missing data at both the variable and observation levels. Each challenge reveals layers of assumptions that the epidemiologist is required to make, from the point of patient entry into the healthcare system, to the provider documenting the results of the clinical exam and follow-up of the patient longitudinally; all with the potential to bias the results of analysis of these data. Understanding the extent of as well as remediating potential biases requires a variety of methodological approaches, from traditional sensitivity analyses and validation studies, to newer techniques such as natural language processing. Beyond methods to address these challenges, it will remain crucial for epidemiologists to engage with clinicians and informaticians at their institutions to ensure data quality and accessibility by forming multidisciplinary teams around specific research projects.

Keywords: Bias; Data quality; Electronic health records; Secondary analysis; Validity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no competing interests to declare

References

    1. Adler-Milstein J, Holmgren AJ, Kralovec P, et al. Electronic health record adoption in US hospitals: the emergence of a digital “advanced use” divide. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017;24(6):1142–1148. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocx080. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. ‘Office-based physician electronic health record adoption’, Health IT quick-stat #50. dashboard.healthit.gov/quickstats/pages/physician-ehr-adoption-trends.php. Accessed 15 Jan 2019.
    1. Cowie MR, Blomster JI, Curtis LH, et al. Electronic health records to facilitate clinical research. Clin Res Cardiol. 2017;106(1):1–9. doi: 10.1007/s00392-016-1025-6. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Casey JA, Schwartz BS, Stewart WF, et al. Using electronic health records for population health research: a review of methods and applications. Annu Rev Public Health. 2016;37:61–81. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032315-021353. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Verheij RA, Curcin V, Delaney BC, et al. Possible sources of bias in primary care electronic health record data use and reuse. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(5):e185. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9134. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types