Dataset Information

A bespoke data linkage of an IVF clinical quality registry to population health datasets; methods and performance.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Assisted reproductive technologies (ART), such as in-vitro fertilisation (IVF), have revolutionised the treatment of infertility, with an estimated 8 million babies born worldwide. However, the long-term health outcomes for women and their offspring remain an area of concern. Linking IVF treatment data to long-term health data is the most efficient method for assessing such outcomes.

Objectives

To describe the creation and performance of a bespoke population-based data linkage of an ART clinical quality registry to state-based and national administrative datasets.

Methods

The linked dataset was created by deterministically and probabilistically linking the Australia and New Zealand Assisted Reproduction Database (ANZARD) to New South Wales (NSW) and Australian Capital Territory (ACT) administrative datasets (performed by NSW Centre for Health Record Linkage (CHeReL)) and to national claims datasets (performed by Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW)). The CHeReL's Master Linkage Key (MLK) was used as a bridge between ANZARD's partially identifiable patient data (statistical linkage key) and NSW and ACT administrative datasets. CHeReL then provided personal identifiers to the AIHW to obtain national content data. The results of the linkage were reported, and concordance between births recorded in ANZARD and perinatal data collections (PDCs) was evaluated.

Results

Of the 62,833 women who had ART treatment in NSW or ACT, 60,419 could be linked to the CHeReL MLK (linkage rate: 96.2%). A reconciliation of ANZARD-recorded births among NSW residents found that 94.2% (95% CI: 93.9-94.4%) of births were also recorded in state/territory-based PDCs. A high concordance was found in plurality status and birth outcome ≥99% agreement rate, Cohen's kappa ranged: 0.78-0.98) between ANZARD and PDCs.

Conclusion

The data linkage resource demonstrates that high linkage rates can be achieved with partially identifiable data and that a population spine, such as the CHeReL's MLK, can be successfully used as a bridge between clinical registries and administrative datasets.

SUBMITTER: Chambers GM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8436881 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:We have established a certification system for antibodies to be used in chromatin immunoprecipitation assays coupled to massive parallel sequencing (ChIP-seq). This certification comprises a standardized ChIP procedure and the attribution of a numerical quality control indicator (QCi) to biological replicate experiments. The QCi computation is based on a universally applicable quality assessment that quantitates the global deviation of randomly sampled subsets of ChIP-seq dataset with the original genome-aligned sequence reads. Comparison with a QCi database for >28,000 ChIP-seq assays were used to attribute quality grades (ranging from âAAAâ to âDDDâ) to a given dataset. In the present report we used the numerical QC system to assess the factors influencing the quality of ChIP-seq assays, including the nature of the target, the sequencing depth and the commercial source of the antibody. We have used this approach specifically to certify mono and polyclonal antibodies obtained from Active Motif directed against the histone modification marks H3K4me3, H3K27ac and H3K9ac for ChIP-seq. The antibodies received the grades AAA to BBA (www.ngs-qc.org). We propose to attribute such quantitative grading of all antibodies attributed with the label âChIP-seq gradeâ. The NGS-QC team has setup a certification procedure for Antibodies dedicated to ChIP-seq applications based on (1)a highly reproducible pipeline for performing ChIP-seq assays including the use of an automated liquid handling platform (TECAN EVO75) for ChIP and sequencing library preparation steps and (2) the use of the NGS-QC Generator tool for providing a ChIP-seq quality grade and to evaluate other parameters like the Optimal sequencing depth, the degree of reproducibility among biological replicates and the comparison of the quality grades of the certified antibody with datasets retrieved in the public domain. This quality certification structure makes possible to assign a measured Quality Stamp to ChIP-seq grade Antibodies.

Project description:IntroductionThe American Hospital Association (AHA) has hospital-level data, while the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has patient-level data. Merging these with other distinct databases would permit analyses of hospital-based specialties, units, or departments, and patient outcomes. One distinct database is the National Emergency Department Inventory (NEDI), which contains information about all EDs in the United States. However, a challenge with merging these databases is that NEDI lists all US EDs individually, while the AHA and CMS group some EDs by hospital network. Consolidating data for this merge may be preferential to excluding grouped EDs. Our objectives were to consolidate ED data to enable linkage with administrative datasets and to determine the effect of excluding grouped EDs on ED-level summary results.MethodsUsing the 2014 NEDI-USA database, we surveyed all New England EDs. We individually matched NEDI EDs with corresponding EDs in the AHA and CMS. A "group match" was assigned when more than one NEDI ED was matched to a single AHA or CMS facility identification number. Within each group, we consolidated individual ED data to create a single observation based on sums or weighted averages of responses as appropriate.ResultsOf the 195 EDs in New England, 169 (87%) completed the NEDI survey. Among these, 130 (77%) EDs were individually listed in AHA and CMS, while 39 were part of groups consisting of 2-3 EDs but represented by one facility ID. Compared to the individually listed EDs, the 39 EDs included in a "group match" had a larger number of annual visits and beds, were more likely to be freestanding, and were less likely to be rural (all P<0.05). Two grouped EDs were excluded because the listed ED did not respond to the NEDI survey; the remaining 37 EDs were consolidated into 19 observations. Thus, the consolidated dataset contained 149 observations representing 171 EDs; this consolidated dataset yielded summary results that were similar to those of the 169 responding EDs.ConclusionExcluding grouped EDs would have resulted in a non-representative dataset. The original vs consolidated NEDI datasets yielded similar results and enabled linkage with large administrative datasets. This approach presents a novel opportunity to use characteristics of hospital-based specialties, units, and departments in studies of patient-level outcomes, to advance health services research.

Project description:IntroductionGlobally, the ways that Indigenous data are collected, used, stored, shared, and analyzed are advancing through Indigenous data governance movements. However, these discussions do not always include the increasingly sensitive nature of linking Indigenous population health (IPH) data. During the International Population Data Linkage Network Conference in September of 2018, Indigenous people from three countries (Canada, New Zealand, and the United States) gathered and set the tone for discussions around Indigenous-driven IPH data linkage.ObjectivesCentering IPH data linkage and research priorities at the conference led to budding discussions from diverse Indigenous populations to share and build on current IPH data linkage themes. This paper provides a braided summary of those discussions which resulted in the SEEDS principles for use when linking IPH data.MethodsDuring the Conference, two sessions and a keynote were Indigenous-led and hosted by international collaborators that focused on regional perspectives on IPH data linkage. A retrospective document analysis of notes, discussions, and artistic contributions gathered from the conference resulted in a summary of shared common approaches to the linkage of IPH data.ResultsThe SEEDS Principles emerge as collective report that outlines a living and expanding set of guiding principles that: 1) prioritizes Indigenous Peoples' right to Self-determination; 2) makes space for Indigenous Peoples to Exercise sovereignty; 3) adheres to Ethical protocols; 4) acknowledges and respects Data stewardship and governance, and; 5) works to Support reconciliation between Indigenous nations and settler states.ConclusionEach of the elements of SEEDS need to be enacted together to create a positive data linkage environment. When implemented together, the SEEDS Principles can lead to more meaningful research and improved Indigenous data governance. The mindful implementation of SEEDS could lead to better measurements of health progress through linkages that are critical to enhancing health care policy and improving health and wellness outcomes for Indigenous nations.