JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Sep 3;7(9):e2431073. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.31073.
ABSTRACT
IMPORTANCE: Without knowledge of the degree of misattribution in racial and ethnic designations in data, studies run the risk of missing existing inequities and disparities and identifying others that do not exist. Further, accuracy of racial and ethnic designations is important to clinical care improvement efforts and health outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the error rate of racial and ethnic attribution in the electronic medical records (EMRs) across the 3 largest pediatric health systems in Michigan.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study collected race and ethnicity data from parents in outpatient clinics, emergency departments, and inpatient units at the 3 largest pediatric health systems in Michigan. A total of 1594 parents or guardians participated at health system A, 1537 at health system B, and 1202 at health system C from September 1, 2023, to January 31, 2024. Parent or guardian report of race and ethnicity for a child was used as the gold standard for comparison with the designation in the EMR.
EXPOSURE: Race and ethnicity designations in the EMR. Options for race designation across the health systems ranged from 6 to 49; options for ethnicity, from 2 to 10.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Matching occurred in 3 stages. First, the exact racial and ethnic designations made by parents for their child were compared with what was found in the EMR. Second, for any child whose parent selected more than 1 racial category or for whom more than 1 appeared in the EMR, the designation of a minoritized racial group was used for matching purposes. Third, starting with the product of stage 2, racial designations were combined or collapsed into 6 (health systems A and C) or 5 (health system B) designations.
RESULTS: A total of 4333 survey responses were included in the analysis. The greatest error rate across the health systems occurred with the exact match of parental report of racial designation with the EMR, which ranged from 41% to 78% across the health systems. Improvement in the matching rate for each health system occurred with consolidation of race options provided. Differences between the health systems narrowed at the final consolidation to varying from 79% to 88% matching. Ethnicity matching between the EMR and the parental report ranged from 65% to 95% across the health systems. Missing race or ethnicity data in the EMR was counted as a nonmatch. Rates of missing racial data varied across the health systems from 2% to 10%. The health system with the greatest number of options for race and ethnicity had the highest error rates.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Although there will always be some misattribution of race and ethnicity in the EMR, the results of this cross-sectional study suggest that significant error in these data may undermine strategies to improve care. It is unclear whether those in an organization who determine the number of potential categories are the same persons who use those data to investigate potential disparities and inequities.
PMID:39226057 | DOI:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.31073
