Review: Electronic Health Records and the Reliability and Validity of Quality Measures: A Review of the Literature
By K. Chan, J. Fowles, J. Weiner. Medical Care Research and Review, 2010
366 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Epidemiology, Health Information Management, Management Science and Operations Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a5e8561b4b5a217007c92fdb9a302335773356ef
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Health Information Management
In Management Science and Operations Research
Citations in the corpus
- Extracting research-quality phenotypes from electronic health records to support precision medicine (2015, background): “EHRs derive from selected populations and their data contain biases [34,45,106]; in particular, they are biased toward sick individuals.”
- Methods and dimensions of electronic health record data quality assessment: enabling reuse for clinical research (2013, background): “Hogan and Wagner, 8 in their 1997 literature review, found 22 that the correctness of data ranged between 44% and 100%, and completeness between 1.1% and 100%, depending the clinical concepts being studied.”
- Defining and measuring completeness of electronic health records for secondary use (2013, neutral): “The presence of incomplete records has been especially well documented [3–6].”
- The use of Electronic Health Records to Support Population Health: A Systematic Review of the Literature (2018, background): “Medical errors may still occur despite the increase of information being gathered from patients with the use of EHR [15].”
- The Impact of eHealth on the Quality and Safety of Health Care: A Systematic Overview (2011, background): “An additional 55 supplementary reviews provided context to the findings [68–122], aiding in their interpretation [123].”