Comparison of health information exchange data with self-report in measuring cancer screening

• Published in: BMC medical research methodology 2023-07, Vol.23 (1), p.172-172, Article 172
• Main Authors: Bhattacharyya, Oindrila, Rawl, Susan M, Dickinson, Stephanie L, Haggstrom, David A
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Breast cancer; Cancer; Cancer screening; Cervical cancer; Colonoscopy; Colorectal cancer; Data entry; Diagnosis; Early detection; Electronic health records; Electronic medical records; Evaluation; Human papillomavirus; Information sources; Mammography; Medical screening; Methods; Pap smear; Patients; Polls & surveys; Self report; Survey; Womens health
• ISSN: 1471-2288; 1471-2288
• DOI: 10.1186/s12874-023-01907-7

Efficient measurement of the receipt of cancer screening has been attempted with electronic health records (EHRs), but EHRs are commonly implemented within a single health care setting. However, health information exchange (HIE) includes EHR data from multiple health care systems and settings, thereby providing a more population-based measurement approach. In this study, we set out to understand the value of statewide HIE data in comparison to survey self-report (SR) to measure population-based cancer screening. A statewide survey was conducted among residents in Indiana who had been seen at an ambulatory or inpatient clinical setting in the past year. Measured cancer screening tests included colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for colorectal cancer, human papilloma virus (HPV) and Pap tests for cervical cancer, and mammogram for breast cancer. For each screening test, the self-reported response for receipt of the screening (yes/no) and 'time since last screening' were compared with the corresponding information from patient HIE to evaluate the concordance between the two measures. Gwet's AC for HIE and self-report of screening receipt ranged from 0.24-0.73, indicating a fair to substantial concordance. For the time since receipt of last screening test, the Gwet's AC ranged from 0.21-0.90, indicating fair to almost perfect concordance. In comparison with SR data, HIE data provided relatively more additional information about laboratory-based tests: FIT (19% HIE alone vs. 4% SR alone) and HPV tests (27% HIE alone vs. 12% SR alone) and less additional information about procedures: colonoscopy (8% HIE alone vs. 23% SR alone), Pap test (13% HIE alone vs. 19% SR alone), or mammography (9% HIE alone vs. 10% SR alone). Studies that use a single data source should consider the type of cancer screening test to choose the optimal data collection method. HIE and self-report both provided unique information in measuring cancer screening, and the most robust measurement approach involves collecting screening information from both HIE and patient self-report.