MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388725462 · doi:10.1370/afm.22.s1.4964

CPCSSN Data Quality: An Opportunity for Enhancing Canadian Primary Care Data

2023· article· en· W4388725462 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare informatics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Coding and Health Information
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComparabilityStandardizationContext (archaeology)Computer scienceData qualityData miningMissing dataMedicineGeographyMathematicsEngineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Context:</h3> Building a source for pan-Canadian EMR data, which has a complex and geographically varied healthcare system, is challenging. For more than a decade, the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN) has been working to develop and standardize primary care data to ensure it is sufficient quality to be a valuable source for clinicians, researchers, and policy makers. A data quality (DQ) framework was developed to evaluate the CPCSSN database. <h3>Objective:</h3> to assess two DQ dimensions (1) accuracy and reliability; and (2) comparability and coherence, using evidence-based indicators. <h3>Study Design and Analysis:</h3> Three indicators were used: (a) element presence-the completeness of common data elements expected to be present or ‘not null’; (b) data source agreement-how information derived from CPCSSN compared to other sources of information; and (c) data across jurisdictions and sources- the prevalence of common data elements across sites, EMR type and province. We used data that included records up until June 30, 2022. <h3>Outcome measure:</h3> (a) % present of common data elements within the database; (b) prevalence of common chronic diseases; and (c) prevalence of common ICD-9 codes, medication codes and lab codes. <h3>Results:</h3> Coded fields within CPCSSN are ≥93% complete for demographic elements. Diagnostic data is highly present in uncoded fields (&lt;6% null) but shows some missingness in coded fields (~75% present). Medication and lab names are well captured (&gt; 99% present) but medication specifications (ex. duration, frequency) need standardization. The prevalence of common chronic diseases estimated using CPCSSN data are reasonable and comparable to estimates from administrative and survey data. Comparing common diagnostic, medication, and lab codes across site, EMR type and province shows that there is a great degree of variation in the use of these common codes at each site, which is influenced by EMR type and province. <h3>Conclusions:</h3> The CPCSSN database has reasonable DQ in terms of accuracy and reliability, and comparability and coherence when it is used for epidemiological research. The indicators highlight the extensive work CPCSSN has done to create coded, standardized information. We recommend CPCSSN operations continues to develop cleaning and processing tools to reduce missingness in coded fields. It is recommended that users request identification of site, EMR and province so that clustering can be accounted for in the analysis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.799
GPT teacher head0.591
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it