Visual analysis and methodology of retrospective chart review_Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Authors：

JING Chengyang ¹ , HU Jing ² ,  LIAO Xing ¹ ,  ZHAN Siyan ³

1. Center for Evidence Based Chinese Medicine, Institute of Basic Research in Clinical Medicine, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing 100700, P. R. China;
2. Beijing Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100010, P. R. China;
3. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing 100191, P. R. China;

Corresponding author：

LIAO Xing, Email: okfrom2008@hotmail.com; ZHAN Siyan, Email: siyan-zhan@bjmu.edu.cn

Keywords：

Retrospective chart review; Real-world study; Real-world data; Methodology; Visual analysis

DOI：

10.7507/1672-2531.202303006

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Retrospective chart review (RCR) is a type of research that answers specific research questions based on the existing patient medical records or related databases through a series of research processes including data extraction, data collation, statistical analysis, etc. Relying on the development of medical big data, as well as the relatively simple implementation process and low cost of information acquisition, RCR is increasingly used in the medical research field. In this paper, we conducted the visual analysis of high-quality RCR published in the past five years, and explored and summarized the current research status and hotspots by analyzing the characteristics of the number of publications, national/regional and institutional cooperation networks, author cooperation networks, keyword co-occurrence and clustering networks. We further systematically combed the methodological core of this kind of research from eight aspects: research question and hypothesis, applicability of chart, study design, data collecting, statistical analysis, interpretation of results, and reporting specification. By summarizing the shortcomings, unique advantages and application prospects of RCR, providing guidance and suggestions for the standardized application of RCR in the medical research field in the future.

Citation： JING Chengyang, HU Jing, LIAO Xing, ZHAN Siyan. Visual analysis and methodology of retrospective chart review. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2023, 23(5): 588-596. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.202303006 Copy

1.	Jansen AC, Van Aalst-Cohen ES, Hutten BA, et al. Guidelines were developed for data collection from medical records for use in retrospective analyses. J Clin Epidemiol, 2005, 58(3): 269-274.
2.	Worster A, Haines T. Advanced statistics: understanding medical record review (MRR) studies. Acad Emerg Med, 2004, 11(2): 187-192.
3.	Vassar M, Holzmann M. The retrospective chart review: important methodological considerations. J Educ Eval Health Prof, 2013, 10: 12.
4.	Klasco RS, Wolfe RE, Lee T, et al. Can medical record reviewers reliably identify errors and adverse events in the ED. Am J Emerg Med, 2016, 34(6): 1043-1048.
5.	Siems A, Banks R, Holubkov R, et al. Structured chart review: assessment of a structured chart review methodology. Hosp Pediatr, 2020, 10(1): 61-69.
6.	Adeleke IT, Adekanye AO, Onawola KA, et al. Data quality assessment in healthcare: a 365-day chart review of inpatients' health records at a Nigerian tertiary hospital. J Am Med Inform Assoc, 2012, 19(6): 1039-1042.
7.	Hale AJ, Nall RW, Mukamal KJ, et al. The effects of resident peer- and self-chart review on outpatient laboratory result follow-up. Acad Med, 2016, 91(5): 717-722.
8.	Lowenstein SR. Medical record reviews in emergency medicine: the blessing and the curse. Ann Emerg Med, 2005, 45(4): 452-455.
9.	Kaji AH, Schriger D, Green S. Looking through the retrospectoscope: reducing bias in emergency medicine chart review studies. Ann Emerg Med, 2014, 64(3): 292-298.
10.	Panacek EA. Performing chart review studies. Air Med J, 2007, 26(5): 206-210.
11.	Gearing RE, Mian IA, Barber J, et al. A methodology for conducting retrospective chart review research in child and adolescent psychiatry. J Can Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 2006, 15(3): 126-134.
12.	陈悦, 陈超美, 刘则渊, 等. CiteSpace知识图谱的方法论功能. 科学研究, 2015, 33(2): 242-253.
13.	Sherman RE, Anderson SA, Dal Pan GJ, et al. Real-world evidence - what is it and what can it tell us. N Engl J Med, 2016, 375(23): 2293-2297.
14.	聂晓路, 彭晓霞. 使用常规收集卫生数据开展观察性研究的报告规范-RECORD规范. 中国循证医学杂志, 2017, 17(4): 475-487.
15.	Lipowski EE. Developing great research questions. Am J Health Syst Pharm, 2008, 65(17): 1667-1670.
16.	Morgan GA, Harmon RJ. Research questions and hypotheses. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 2000, 39(2): 261-263.
17.	Amir-Behghadami M, Janati A. Population, intervention, comparison, outcomes and study (PICOS) design as a framework to formulate eligibility criteria in systematic reviews. Emerg Med J, 2020, 37(6): 387.
18.	Shang N, Weng C, Hripcsak G. A conceptual framework for evaluating data suitability for observational studies. J Am Med Inform Assoc, 2018, 25(3): 248-258.
19.	Weiskopf NG, Weng C. Methods and dimensions of electronic health record data quality assessment: enabling reuse for clinical research. J Am Med Inform Assoc, 2013, 20(1): 144-151.
20.	于玥琳, 卓琳, 孟若谷, 等. 真实世界数据适用性评价方法的研究进展与前景挑战. 中华流行病学杂志, 2022, 43(4): 578-585.
21.	Luck J, Peabody JW, Dresselhaus TR, et al. How well does chart abstraction measure quality. A prospective comparison of standardized patients with the medical record. Am J Med, 2000, 108(8): 642-649.
22.	Gregory KE, Radovinsky L. Research strategies that result in optimal data collection from the patient medical record. Appl Nurs Res, 2012, 25(2): 108-116.
23.	Yawn BP, Wollan P. Interrater reliability: completing the methods description in medical records review studies. Am J Epidemiol, 2005, 161(10): 974-977.
24.	Nammour FL, Mansour N, Danas K. Using performance measurement in healthcare analytics; proceedings of the 14th mediterranean conference on medical and biological engineering and computing (MEDICON). Paphos, 2016.
25.	Liddy C, Wiens M, Hogg W. Methods to achieve high interrater reliability in data collection from primary care medical records. Ann Fam Med, 2011, 9(1): 57-62.
26.	Bauman JL, Jackevicius C, Zillich AJ, et al. On the methodology of retrospective chart reviews. JACCP, 2019, 2(1): 6-7.
27.	Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet, 2007, 370(9596): 1453-1457.
28.	Nicholls SG, Quach P, Von Elm E, et al. The reporting of studies conducted using observational routinely-collected health data (RECORD) statement: methods for arriving at consensus and developing reporting guidelines. PLoS One, 2015, 10(5): e0125620.
29.	Lash TL, Fox MP, Thwin SS, et al. Using probabilistic corrections to account for abstractor agreement in medical record reviews. Am J Epidemiol, 2007, 165(12): 1454-1461.
30.	Reisch LM, Fosse JS, Beverly K, et al. Training, quality assurance, and assessment of medical record abstraction in a multisite study. Am J Epidemiol, 2003, 157(6): 546-551.
31.	To T, Estrabillo E, Wang C, et al. Examining intra-rater and inter-rater response agreement: a medical chart abstraction study of a community-based asthma care program. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2008, 8: 29.
32.	Bao XY, Wang QN, Zhang Y, et al. Epidemiology of moyamoya disease in China: single-center, population-based study. World Neurosurg, 2019, 122: e917-e923.
33.	Wang Y, Zhang Z, Wang X, et al. Validation and extension study exploring the role of RNF213 p. R4810K in 2, 877 Chinese moyamoya disease patients. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis, 2021, 30(11): 106071.
34.	Mi JP, He P, Shi K, et al. Cephalometric craniofacial features of patients with Sagliker syndrome: a primary analysis of our experience. Ann Transl Med, 2021, 9(12): 963.
35.	Buske C, Sadullah S, Kastritis E, et al. Treatment and outcome patterns in European patients with Waldenström's macroglobulinaemia: a large, observational, retrospective chart review. Lancet Haematol, 2018, 5(7): e299-e309.
36.	Shiu C, Starker R, Kwal J, et al. Zika virus testing and outcomes during pregnancy, Florida, USA, 2016. Emerg Infect Dis, 2018, 24(1): 1-8.
37.	Zheng J, Chen YH. Impact of COVID-19 on paediatric admissions to a Chinese hospital: a single-centre retrospective chart review. BMJ Open, 2022, 12(7): e058770.
38.	王雯, 谭婧, 任燕, 等. 重新认识真实世界数据研究: 更新与展望. 中国循证医学杂志, 2020, 20(11): 1241-1246.
39.	Concato J, Corrigan-Curay J. Real-world evidence - where are we now. N Engl J Med, 2022, 386(18): 1680-1682.
40.	冯菁楠, 王胜锋, 詹思延. 基于医疗保险数据的数据库准确性验证方法学进展. 中华流行病学杂志, 2019, 40(10): 1324-1328.

1. Jansen AC, Van Aalst-Cohen ES, Hutten BA, et al. Guidelines were developed for data collection from medical records for use in retrospective analyses. J Clin Epidemiol, 2005, 58(3): 269-274.
2. Worster A, Haines T. Advanced statistics: understanding medical record review (MRR) studies. Acad Emerg Med, 2004, 11(2): 187-192.
3. Vassar M, Holzmann M. The retrospective chart review: important methodological considerations. J Educ Eval Health Prof, 2013, 10: 12.
4. Klasco RS, Wolfe RE, Lee T, et al. Can medical record reviewers reliably identify errors and adverse events in the ED. Am J Emerg Med, 2016, 34(6): 1043-1048.
5. Siems A, Banks R, Holubkov R, et al. Structured chart review: assessment of a structured chart review methodology. Hosp Pediatr, 2020, 10(1): 61-69.
6. Adeleke IT, Adekanye AO, Onawola KA, et al. Data quality assessment in healthcare: a 365-day chart review of inpatients' health records at a Nigerian tertiary hospital. J Am Med Inform Assoc, 2012, 19(6): 1039-1042.
7. Hale AJ, Nall RW, Mukamal KJ, et al. The effects of resident peer- and self-chart review on outpatient laboratory result follow-up. Acad Med, 2016, 91(5): 717-722.
8. Lowenstein SR. Medical record reviews in emergency medicine: the blessing and the curse. Ann Emerg Med, 2005, 45(4): 452-455.
9. Kaji AH, Schriger D, Green S. Looking through the retrospectoscope: reducing bias in emergency medicine chart review studies. Ann Emerg Med, 2014, 64(3): 292-298.
10. Panacek EA. Performing chart review studies. Air Med J, 2007, 26(5): 206-210.
11. Gearing RE, Mian IA, Barber J, et al. A methodology for conducting retrospective chart review research in child and adolescent psychiatry. J Can Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 2006, 15(3): 126-134.
12. 陈悦, 陈超美, 刘则渊, 等. CiteSpace知识图谱的方法论功能. 科学研究, 2015, 33(2): 242-253.
13. Sherman RE, Anderson SA, Dal Pan GJ, et al. Real-world evidence - what is it and what can it tell us. N Engl J Med, 2016, 375(23): 2293-2297.
14. 聂晓路, 彭晓霞. 使用常规收集卫生数据开展观察性研究的报告规范-RECORD规范. 中国循证医学杂志, 2017, 17(4): 475-487.
15. Lipowski EE. Developing great research questions. Am J Health Syst Pharm, 2008, 65(17): 1667-1670.
16. Morgan GA, Harmon RJ. Research questions and hypotheses. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 2000, 39(2): 261-263.
17. Amir-Behghadami M, Janati A. Population, intervention, comparison, outcomes and study (PICOS) design as a framework to formulate eligibility criteria in systematic reviews. Emerg Med J, 2020, 37(6): 387.
18. Shang N, Weng C, Hripcsak G. A conceptual framework for evaluating data suitability for observational studies. J Am Med Inform Assoc, 2018, 25(3): 248-258.
19. Weiskopf NG, Weng C. Methods and dimensions of electronic health record data quality assessment: enabling reuse for clinical research. J Am Med Inform Assoc, 2013, 20(1): 144-151.
20. 于玥琳, 卓琳, 孟若谷, 等. 真实世界数据适用性评价方法的研究进展与前景挑战. 中华流行病学杂志, 2022, 43(4): 578-585.
21. Luck J, Peabody JW, Dresselhaus TR, et al. How well does chart abstraction measure quality. A prospective comparison of standardized patients with the medical record. Am J Med, 2000, 108(8): 642-649.
22. Gregory KE, Radovinsky L. Research strategies that result in optimal data collection from the patient medical record. Appl Nurs Res, 2012, 25(2): 108-116.
23. Yawn BP, Wollan P. Interrater reliability: completing the methods description in medical records review studies. Am J Epidemiol, 2005, 161(10): 974-977.
24. Nammour FL, Mansour N, Danas K. Using performance measurement in healthcare analytics; proceedings of the 14th mediterranean conference on medical and biological engineering and computing (MEDICON). Paphos, 2016.
25. Liddy C, Wiens M, Hogg W. Methods to achieve high interrater reliability in data collection from primary care medical records. Ann Fam Med, 2011, 9(1): 57-62.
26. Bauman JL, Jackevicius C, Zillich AJ, et al. On the methodology of retrospective chart reviews. JACCP, 2019, 2(1): 6-7.
27. Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet, 2007, 370(9596): 1453-1457.
28. Nicholls SG, Quach P, Von Elm E, et al. The reporting of studies conducted using observational routinely-collected health data (RECORD) statement: methods for arriving at consensus and developing reporting guidelines. PLoS One, 2015, 10(5): e0125620.
29. Lash TL, Fox MP, Thwin SS, et al. Using probabilistic corrections to account for abstractor agreement in medical record reviews. Am J Epidemiol, 2007, 165(12): 1454-1461.
30. Reisch LM, Fosse JS, Beverly K, et al. Training, quality assurance, and assessment of medical record abstraction in a multisite study. Am J Epidemiol, 2003, 157(6): 546-551.
31. To T, Estrabillo E, Wang C, et al. Examining intra-rater and inter-rater response agreement: a medical chart abstraction study of a community-based asthma care program. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2008, 8: 29.
32. Bao XY, Wang QN, Zhang Y, et al. Epidemiology of moyamoya disease in China: single-center, population-based study. World Neurosurg, 2019, 122: e917-e923.
33. Wang Y, Zhang Z, Wang X, et al. Validation and extension study exploring the role of RNF213 p. R4810K in 2, 877 Chinese moyamoya disease patients. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis, 2021, 30(11): 106071.
34. Mi JP, He P, Shi K, et al. Cephalometric craniofacial features of patients with Sagliker syndrome: a primary analysis of our experience. Ann Transl Med, 2021, 9(12): 963.
35. Buske C, Sadullah S, Kastritis E, et al. Treatment and outcome patterns in European patients with Waldenström's macroglobulinaemia: a large, observational, retrospective chart review. Lancet Haematol, 2018, 5(7): e299-e309.
36. Shiu C, Starker R, Kwal J, et al. Zika virus testing and outcomes during pregnancy, Florida, USA, 2016. Emerg Infect Dis, 2018, 24(1): 1-8.
37. Zheng J, Chen YH. Impact of COVID-19 on paediatric admissions to a Chinese hospital: a single-centre retrospective chart review. BMJ Open, 2022, 12(7): e058770.
38. 王雯, 谭婧, 任燕, 等. 重新认识真实世界数据研究: 更新与展望. 中国循证医学杂志, 2020, 20(11): 1241-1246.
39. Concato J, Corrigan-Curay J. Real-world evidence - where are we now. N Engl J Med, 2022, 386(18): 1680-1682.
40. 冯菁楠, 王胜锋, 詹思延. 基于医疗保险数据的数据库准确性验证方法学进展. 中华流行病学杂志, 2019, 40(10): 1324-1328.

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Visual analysis and methodology of retrospective chart review

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content