TABLE 2.
NHIRD | EHR-claims agreement | EHR outcome representativeness | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Yes | No | ||||
a) Cardiovascular events | |||||
NTUH-iMD | Yes | 143 | 24 | 96% | 51% |
No | 140 | 3,538 | |||
b) Nephropathy-related events | |||||
NTUH-iMD | Yes | 793 | 66 | 81% | 55% |
No | 648 | 2,338 | |||
c) Heart failure admission | |||||
NTUH-iMD | Yes | 39 | 28 | 98% | 49% |
No | 40 | 3,738 |
Outcome events were assessed during the 24-month follow-up period. We calculated EHR-claims agreement by dividing the number of patients whose outcome status were coded in the same way in both the EHRs and linked claims database by the total number of patients who appeared in both databases. A patient defined as having the outcome in both the EHRs and the claims database, or not having the outcome in either database, would suggest high agreement. We calculated EHR outcome representativeness by dividing the number of patients classified as having the outcome in both the EHRs and the claims database by the number of patients classified as having the outcome in the claims database. See Supplementary Table S3 for the definitions and calculations of EHR-claims agreement and EHR representativeness.
EHR, electronic health record.