ReviewCritical care (London, England)2026
Discovery of data quality issues in electronic health records: profound consequences for critical care medicine applications - a systematized review.
Review in Critical care (London, England), 2026. 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.
- Automated Prediction of Glasgow Coma Scale Scores From Unstructured Electronic Health Records Using Natural Language Processing: Development and Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionElectronic health records (EHRs) in critical care settings generate vast amounts of data that increasingly drive machine learning (ML) models for clinical decision support, yet data quality issues may have profound consequences for downstream prediction, classification, and optimization applications. This study aims to systematically examine EHR data quality issues in critical care medicine and their impact on ML model performance, clinical outcomes, and patient safety.
methodsWe conducted a systematized review following expert-based questions, searching MEDLINE, Embase, IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Library, CINAHL, Google Scholar, DBLP, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Six distinct questions addressed missing data patterns, temporal data quality, bias and health equity, multi-modal integration, real-time monitoring, and institutional variability.
results281 relevant studies examining EHR data quality in critical care settings. After applying the eligibility criteria, 29 studies were selected. EHR data quality issues in critical care were pervasive and multifaceted. Missing data rates exceeded 80% for some variables, with 40% of predictive features being missingness indicators rather than actual values. EHR-related medication errors comprised 34% of all medication errors in ICUs, with one-third having life-threatening potential. Copy-paste prevalence reached 82% in residents’ progress notes. ML model performance degraded significantly under real-world conditions, with external validation showing AUC drops from 0.76 to 0.63 for sepsis detection models. Temporal data quality deteriorated throughout ICU stays, with vital sign quality degrading at 60–75% of average length of stay.
conclusionData quality issues in critical care EHRs create cascading effects that compromise ML model reliability, clinical decision-making, and patient safety. The evidence demonstrates an urgent need for systematic data quality monitoring, bias-aware assessment methods, and comprehensive quality improvement frameworks specifically designed for critical care environments.
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.