Electronic patient records in general practice

doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7322.1184

BMJ 2001;323:1184 ( 17 November )

Letters

Electronic patient records in general practice

Published methods of measuring the accuracy of electronic records do exist

Methods of evaluation of electronic patient records entail dangers

Authors' reply

Published methods of measuring the accuracy of electronic records do exist

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR $---$ Hassey et al have highlighted the importance of ensuring that electronic records are accurate.¹ In their study theyexplored a method of measuring the validity and utility of electronicrecords in general practice, including whether the coding of 15marker diagnoses was a true reflection of the actualprevalence.

They are, however, wrong in their assertion that no published accounts of measuring the validity of electronic record contentsexist. Hogan and Wagner performed a literature review and compared20 articles that met certain quality criteria.² They recommended(as did Hassey et al) that measures of completeness (sensitivityor detection rate) and correctness (positive predictive value)were valuable. These measures have also been shown to be valuablein measuring the quality of data retrieval.³

Other measures derived from 2×2 contingency tables are less likely to be helpful because of the combination of a large totalnumber of records and true . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us Add to Digg

Digg

StumbleUpon Add to Technorati

Technorati What's this?

Relevant Article

A survey of validity and utility of electronic patient records in a general practice: Alan Hassey, David Gerrett, and Ali Wilson
BMJ 2001 322: 1401-1405. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

Jordan, K., Porcheret, M., Croft, P. (2004). Quality of morbidity coding in general practice computerized medical records: a systematic review. Fam Pract 21: 396-412 [Abstract] [Full text]