Evaluating Population Coverage in a Regional Distributed Data Network: Implications for Electronic Health Record–Based Public Health Surveillance. (September 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Scott, Kenneth A.; Bacon, Emily; Kraus, Emily McCormick; Steiner, John F.; Budney, Gregory; Bondy, Jessica; McEwen, L. Dean; Davidson, Arthur J.
• Is Part Of: Public health reports. Volume 135:Number 5(2020)
• Page Start: 621
• Page End: 630
• Publication Date: 2020-09
• Subjects: public health informatics -- public health surveillance -- demography -- electronic health records -- network; Public health -- United States -- Periodicals; 614.0973
• DOI: 10.1177/0033354920941158
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0033-3549

Abstract

Objective: Electronic health records (EHRs) hold promise as a public health surveillance tool, but questions remain about how EHR patients compare with populations in health and demographic surveys. We compared population characteristics from a regional distributed data network (DDN), which securely and confidentially aggregates EHR data from multiple health care organizations in the same geographic region, with population characteristics from health and demographic surveys. Methods: Ten health care organizations participating in a Colorado DDN contributed data for coverage estimation. We aggregated demographic and geographic data from 2017 for patients aged ≥18 residing in 7 counties. We used a cross-sectional design to compare DDN population size, by county, with the following survey-estimated populations: the county population, estimated by the American Community Survey (ACS); residents seeking any health care, estimated by the Colorado Health Access Survey; and residents seeking routine (eg, primary) health care, estimated by the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. We also compared data on the DDN and survey populations by sex, age group, race/ethnicity, and poverty level to assess surveillance system representativeness. Results: The DDN population included 609 840 people in 7 counties, corresponding to 25% coverage of the general adult population. Population coverage ranged from 15% to 35% across counties. Demographic distributions generated by DDN and surveys were similar for many groups. Overall, the DDN and surveys assessing care-seeking populations had a higher proportion of women and older adults than the ACS population. The DDN included higher proportions of Hispanic people and people living in high-poverty neighborhoods compared with the surveys. Conclusion: The DDN population is not a random sample of the regional adult population; it is influenced by health care use patterns and organizations participating in the DDN. Strengths and limitations of DDNs complement those of survey-based approaches. The regional DDN is a promising public health surveillance tool.