Digital Health Data Quality Issues: Systematic Review

被引:23
作者
Syed, Rehan [1 ,3 ]
Eden, Rebekah [1 ]
Makasi, Tendai [1 ]
Chukwudi, Ignatius [1 ]
Mamudu, Azumah [1 ]
Kamalpour, Mostafa [1 ]
Geeganage, Dakshi Kapugama [1 ]
Sadeghianasl, Sareh [1 ]
Leemans, Sander J. J. [2 ]
Goel, Kanika [1 ]
Andrews, Robert [1 ]
Wynn, Moe Thandar [1 ]
ter Hofstede, Arthur [1 ]
Myers, Trina [1 ]
机构
[1] Queensland Univ Technol, Fac Sci, Sch Informat Syst, Brisbane, Australia
[2] Rhein Westfal TH Aachen, Rhein Westfal TH, Aachen, Germany
[3] Queensland Univ Technol, Fac Sci, Sch Informat Syst, 2 George St, Brisbane 4000, Australia
关键词
data quality; digital health; electronic health record; eHealth; systematic reviews; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL-RECORD; REAL-WORLD DATA; INFORMATION QUALITY; EMERGENCY CARE; COMPLETENESS; EHR; TIME; FRAMEWORK; REGISTRY; FIT;
D O I
10.2196/42615
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: The promise of digital health is principally dependent on the ability to electronically capture data that can be analyzed to improve decision-making. However, the ability to effectively harness data has proven elusive, largely because of the quality of the data captured. Despite the importance of data quality (DQ), an agreed-upon DQ taxonomy evades literature. When consolidated frameworks are developed, the dimensions are often fragmented, without consideration of the interrelationships among the dimensions or their resultant impact. Objective: The aim of this study was to develop a consolidated digital health DQ dimension and outcome (DQ-DO) framework to provide insights into 3 research questions: What are the dimensions of digital health DQ? How are the dimensions of digital health DQ related? and What are the impacts of digital health DQ? Methods: Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, a developmental systematic literature review was conducted of peer-reviewed literature focusing on digital health DQ in predominately hospital settings. A total of 227 relevant articles were retrieved and inductively analyzed to identify digital health DQ dimensions and outcomes. The inductive analysis was performed through open coding, constant comparison, and card sorting with subject matter experts to identify digital health DQ dimensions and digital health DQ outcomes. Subsequently, a computer-assisted analysis was performed and verified by DQ experts to identify the interrelationships among the DQ dimensions and relationships between DQ dimensions and outcomes. The analysis resulted in the development of the DQ-DO framework. Results: The digital health DQ-DO framework consists of 6 dimensions of DQ, namely accessibility, accuracy, completeness, consistency, contextual validity, and currency; interrelationships among the dimensions of digital health DQ, with consistency being the most influential dimension impacting all other digital health DQ dimensions; 5 digital health DQ outcomes, namely clinical, clinician, research-related, business process, and organizational outcomes; and relationships between the digital health DQ dimensions and DQ outcomes, with the consistency and accessibility dimensions impacting all DQ outcomes. Conclusions: The DQ-DO framework developed in this study demonstrates the complexity of digital health DQ and the necessity for reducing digital health DQ issues. The framework further provides health care executives with holistic insights into DQ issues and resultant outcomes, which can help them prioritize which DQ-related problems to tackle first.
引用
收藏
页数:22
相关论文
共 184 条
  • [1] Aalsma Matthew C, 2019, EGEMS (Wash DC), V7, P26, DOI 10.5334/egems.258
  • [2] Abiy Rahel, 2018, Online J Public Health Inform, V10, pe212, DOI 10.5210/ojphi.v10i2.8309
  • [3] An exploratory data quality analysis of time series physiologic signals using a large-scale intensive care unit database
    Afshar, Ali S.
    Li, Yijun
    Chen, Zixu
    Chen, Yuxuan
    Lee, Jae Hun
    Irani, Darius
    Crank, Aidan
    Singh, Digvijay
    Kanter, Michael
    Faraday, Nauder
    Kharrazi, Hadi
    [J]. JAMIA OPEN, 2021, 4 (03)
  • [4] Comprehensible knowledge model creation for cancer treatment decision making
    Afzal, Muhammad
    Hussain, Maqbool
    Khan, Wajahat Ali
    Ali, Taqdir
    Lee, Sungyoung
    Huh, Eui-Nam
    Ahmad, Hafiz Farooq
    Jamshed, Arif
    Iqbal, Hassan
    Irfan, Muhammad
    Hydari, Manzar Abbas
    [J]. COMPUTERS IN BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE, 2017, 82 : 119 - 129
  • [5] Strategies to Access Patient Clinical Data from Distributed Databases
    Almeida, Joao Rafael
    Fajarda, Olga
    Pereira, Arnaldo
    Oliveira, Jose Luis
    [J]. HEALTHINF: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 12TH INTERNATIONAL JOINT CONFERENCE ON BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING SYSTEMS AND TECHNOLOGIES - VOL 5: HEALTHINF, 2019, : 466 - 473
  • [6] Almutiry O, 2013, INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INFORMATION SOCIETY (I-SOCIETY 2013), P153
  • [7] Can openEHR Represent the Clinical Concepts of an Obstetric-Specific EHR-ObsCare Software?
    Alves, Danielle Santos
    Maranhao, Priscila A.
    Pereira, Ana Margarida
    Bacelar-Silva, Gustavo M.
    Silva-Costa, Tiago
    Beale, Thomas William
    Cruz-Correia, Ricardo J.
    [J]. MEDINFO 2019: HEALTH AND WELLBEING E-NETWORKS FOR ALL, 2019, 264 : 773 - 777
  • [8] Measuring the quality and completeness of medication-related information derived from hospital electronic health records database
    Alwhaibi, Monira
    Balkhi, Bander
    Alshammari, Thamir M.
    AlQahtani, Nasser
    Mahmoud, Mansour A.
    Almetwazi, Mansour
    Ata, Sondus
    Basyoni, Mada
    Alhawassi, Tariq
    [J]. SAUDI PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL, 2019, 27 (04) : 502 - 506
  • [9] Root-cause analysis of process-data quality problems
    Andrews, Robert
    Emamjome, Fahame
    ter Hofstede, Arthur H. M.
    Reijers, Hajo A. A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ANALYTICS, 2022, 5 (01) : 51 - 75
  • [10] [Anonymous], 2021, Global strategy on digital health 2020-2025