3.8 Article

Assessing an electronic self-report method for improving quality of ethnicity and race data in the Veterans Health Administration

Journal

JAMIA OPEN
Volume 6, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jamiaopen/ooad020

Keywords

electronic screening; Veterans; health equity; racial and ethnic disparities

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated the accuracy and completeness of self-reported electronic screening (eScreening) in a VA Transition Care Management Program. The results showed that eScreening had lower rates of missingness in ethnicity data compared to other methods, but higher rates of decline to answer. There were no significant differences in race data between eScreening and other methods. In conclusion, eScreening is a promising method for improving the accuracy and completeness of ethnicity and race data in VA.
Objective Evaluate self-reported electronic screening (eScreening) in a VA Transition Care Management Program (TCM) to improve the accuracy and completeness of administrative ethnicity and race data.Materials and Methods We compared missing, declined, and complete (neither missing nor declined) rates between (1) TCM-eScreening (ethnicity and race entered into electronic tablet directly by patient using eScreening), (2) TCM-EHR (Veteran-completed paper form plus interview, data entered by staff), and (3) Standard-EHR (multiple processes, data entered by staff). The TCM-eScreening (n = 7113) and TCM-EHR groups (n = 7113) included post-9/11 Veterans. Standard-EHR Veterans included all non-TCM Gulf War and post-9/11 Veterans at VA San Diego (n = 92 921).Results Ethnicity: TCM-eScreening had lower rates of missingness than TCM-EHR and Standard-EHR (3.0% vs 5.3% and 8.6%, respectively, P < .05), but higher rates of decline to answer (7% vs 0.5% and 1.2%, P < .05). TCM-EHR had higher data completeness than TCM-eScreening and Standard-EHR (94.2% vs 90% and 90.2%, respectively, P < .05). Race: No differences between TCM-eScreening and TCM-EHR for missingness (3.5% vs 3.4%, P > .05) or data completeness (89.9% vs 91%, P > .05). Both had better data completeness than Standard-EHR (P < .05), which despite the lowest rate of decline to answer (3%) had the highest missingness (10.3%) and lowest overall completeness (86.6%). There was strong agreement between TCM-eScreening and TCM-EHR for ethnicity (Kappa = .92) and for Asian, Black, and White Veteran race (Kappas = .87 to .97), but lower agreement for American Indian/Alaska Native (Kappa = .59) and Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander (Kappa = .50) Veterans.Conculsions eScreening is a promising method for improving ethnicity and race data accuracy and completeness in VA.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available