Methodological Challenges when Using Routinely Collected Health Data for Research: A scoping review.

Routinely collected health data (RCD) including electronic health records, disease registries, health administrative data and wearables data are not specifically collected for research purposes. Analysis of these data poses unique methodological challenges that must be addressed when conducting research, particularly as availability and use increase. This scoping review aimed to identify methodological challenges in research using RCD from existing literature (registered protocol: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/EBM4D). We searched 6 electronic databases, including medical, health economics, nursing and psychology research databases, between Jan 2015 and Jan 2023, combining multiple “RCD” and “research” search terms (e.g., epidemiologic, informatics, pharmaceutical research). After screening abstracts and full-texts, we doubly extracted methodological themes, categorizing them into different study stages. We screened more than 23,000 records and included 430 papers. Bias and confounding were the most common methodological issues identified, discussed in relation to both study design and data analysis. Data quality, including data accuracy, validation, completeness, timeliness and cleaning, also posed substantial challenges, particularly during data processing stage. Record linkage and conducting analyses using distributed health networks also pose unique methodological challenges. Heterogeneity, incorporating social determinants of health and statistical models that address methodological challenges are also described in the literature. External validity and reporting are important considerations for RCD research. Our review identified several methodological challenges facing researchers using RCD. These issues should be addressed to ensure methodologically sound research. These findings will inform the development of a standardized protocol template and accompanying educational platform aimed at enhancing methodological quality and transparency when conducting research using RCD.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal for Population Data Science
Published
2024-09-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.23889/ijpds.v9i5.2610
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Health disparities and outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.06

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Methodological Challenges when Using Routinely Collected Health Data for Research: A scoping review.

Sinéad Langan, Katie Harron, Scott D. Emerson, Astrid Guttmann et al.
2 citations
International Journal for Population Data Science
Health disparities and outcomes
1.06
article

Methodological Challenges when Using Routinely Collected Health Data for Research: A scoping review.

Sinéad Langan, Katie Harron, Scott D. Emerson, Astrid Guttmann, James Im, Taylor McLinden, M Ellen Kuenzig, Henrik Toft Sørensen, Sigrún Alba Jóhannesdóttir Schmidt, Shirley Wang, Eric I. Benchimol, Richard Shaw, Lili Wei, David McAllister, An‐Wen Chan, Jerry M Maniate, David Moher, Lars G. Hemkens, William G Dixon, Véra Ehrenstein, Ronan A Lyons, Irene Petersen, Hude Quan, Henry Halder, Yan Zheng, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, Azza Eissa, Shannon E. MacDonald
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Routinely collected health data (RCD) including electronic health records, disease registries, health administrative data and wearables data are not specifically collected for research purposes. Analysis of these data poses unique methodological challenges that must be addressed when conducting research, particularly as availability and use increase. This scoping review aimed to identify methodological challenges in research using RCD from existing literature (registered protocol: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/EBM4D). We searched 6 electronic databases, including medical, health economics, nursing and psychology research databases, between Jan 2015 and Jan 2023, combining multiple “RCD” and “research” search terms (e.g., epidemiologic, informatics, pharmaceutical research). After screening abstracts and full-texts, we doubly extracted methodological themes, categorizing them into different study stages. We screened more than 23,000 records and included 430 papers. Bias and confounding were the most common methodological issues identified, discussed in relation to both study design and data analysis. Data quality, including data accuracy, validation, completeness, timeliness and cleaning, also posed substantial challenges, particularly during data processing stage. Record linkage and conducting analyses using distributed health networks also pose unique methodological challenges. Heterogeneity, incorporating social determinants of health and statistical models that address methodological challenges are also described in the literature. External validity and reporting are important considerations for RCD research. Our review identified several methodological challenges facing researchers using RCD. These issues should be addressed to ensure methodologically sound research. These findings will inform the development of a standardized protocol template and accompanying educational platform aimed at enhancing methodological quality and transparency when conducting research using RCD.

International Journal for Population Data ScienceVol. 9(5)
Alberta Health Services (CA), University of Ottawa (CA), University of Alberta (CA), Tel Aviv University (IL), University of Calgary (CA), Simon Fraser University (CA), University of Toronto (CA), Aarhus University (DK), Hospital for Sick Children (CA), Odense University Hospital (DK), Harvard University Press (US), Aarhus University Hospital (DK), University of Manchester (GB), Swansea University (GB), London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB), Hospital Base (CL), AIDS Vancouver (CA), University College London (GB), University of Glasgow (GB), University of Health Sciences Antigua (AG)
Economic and Social Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 21%
Health disparities and outcomes
1.06
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.