ArticleStatistics in medicine2025
Integrating Misclassified EHR Outcomes With Validated Outcomes From a Non-Probability Sample.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An operational target trial emulation framework for causal inference using electronic health record data.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although increasingly used for research, electronic health records (EHR) often lack a gold-standard assessment of key data elements. Linking EHRs to other data sources with higher-quality measurements can improve statistical inference, but such analyses must account for selection bias if the linked data source arises from a non-probability sample. We propose a set of novel estimators targeting the average treatment effect (ATE) that combine information from binary outcomes measured with error in a large, population-representative EHR database with gold-standard outcomes obtained from a smaller validation sample subject to selection bias. We evaluate our approach in extensive simulations and an analysis of data from the Adult Changes in Thought (ACT) study, a longitudinal study of incident dementia in a cohort of Kaiser Permanente Washington members with linked EHR data. For a subset of deceased ACT participants who consented to brain autopsy prior to death, gold-standard measures of Alzheimer's disease neuropathology are available. Our proposed estimators reduced bias and improved efficiency for the ATE, facilitating valid inference with EHR data when key data elements are ascertained with error.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.