Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 1442778

How good are the data? USRDS data validation special study.

Abstract

Four national samples, totaling 1,692 cases selected from ESRD patients incident in 1986 and 1987, were analyzed to document the reliability of the USRDS database. For these cases, the reported data in the USRDS database were compared with on-site source documents (medical records, hospital discharge summary records, transplant summaries, and billing records). The results show an overall agreement rate of 90.6 percent for over 50 variables. Agreement rates on the most important fields range from a low of 87.0 percent for point-in-time variables (eg, modality of treatment at the end of the year), to a high of 94.9 percent for dates (eg, date of birth, death, first ESRD service). The study concludes that (1) appropriate definitions and protocols are needed in the assessment of the primary disease causing ESRD, and (2) formal definition of when the patient becomes an ESRD patient needs review. This study points to the strengths and limitations of the USRDS database and indicates areas that need to be addressed to improve current and future data collection efforts.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

1992. How good are the data? USRDS data validation special study.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1442778/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Probability estimation when some observations are grouped.

This paper considers the use of additional questions for decreasing survey non-response rates and an approach for estimating a probability based on the results obtained. In a survey, the respondents are asked to answer an original question and follow-up questions, where the answers for the follow-up questions are grouped answers for the original question. For example, respondents are asked to provide an exact number of incidents, but in cases of 'Do not know' or 'Refuse' responses, they are subsequently asked to pick an answer from a less specific categorical scale. The new estimator obtains smaller variance asymptotically and does not depend on a distribution family. This method is applied to income questions in a survey regarding injury prevention and behaviours. Another application is survey data on intimate partner violence, where some amendments were applied for incorporating post-stratification weights and for using non-random grouping. For additional illustration, an example of parameter estimation on artificially generated data is presented.

Data Collection↗