Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Replicating a COVID-19 study in a national England database to assess the generalisability of research with regional electronic health record data

View ORCID ProfileRichard Williams, David Jenkins, Thomas Bolton, Adrian Heald, Mehrdad A Mizani, Matthew Sperrin, Niels Peek the CVD-COVID-UK/COVID-IMPACT Consortium
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.06.24311538
Richard Williams
aDivision of Informatics, Imaging and Data Science, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
bNIHR Applied Research Collaboration Greater Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Richard Williams
  • For correspondence: richard.williams{at}manchester.ac.uk
David Jenkins
aDivision of Informatics, Imaging and Data Science, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Thomas Bolton
cBritish Heart Foundation Data Science Centre, Health Data Research UK, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Adrian Heald
dDepartment of Diabetes and Endocrinology, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mehrdad A Mizani
cBritish Heart Foundation Data Science Centre, Health Data Research UK, London, UK
eInstitute of Health Informatics, University College London, London NW1 2DA, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Matthew Sperrin
aDivision of Informatics, Imaging and Data Science, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Niels Peek
aDivision of Informatics, Imaging and Data Science, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
fThe Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute (THIS Institute), Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Objectives To assess the degree to which we can replicate a study between a regional and a national database of electronic health record data in the United Kingdom.

Design A replication of a retrospective cohort study.

Setting Observational EHR data from primary and secondary care sources in the UK. The original study used data from a large, urbanised region (Greater Manchester Care Record, Greater Manchester, UK). This replication study used a national database covering the whole of England, UK (NHS England’s Secure Data Environment service for England, accessed via the BHF Data Science Centre’s CVD-COVID-UK/COVID-IMPACT Consortium).

Participants Individuals with a diagnosis of T1D or T2D prior to a positive COVID-19 test result. The matched controls (3:1) were individuals who had a positive COVID-19 test result, but who did not have a diagnosis of diabetes on the date of their positive COVID-19 test result. Matching was done on age at COVID-19 diagnosis, sex and approximate date of COVID-19 test.

Primary and secondary outcome measures Hospitalization within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test.

Results We found that many of the effect sizes did not show a statistically significant difference. Where effect sizes were statistically significant in the regional study, then they remained significant in the national study and the effect size was the same direction and of similar magnitude.

Conclusions There is some evidence that the findings from studies in smaller regional datasets can be extrapolated to a larger, national setting. However, there were some significant differences and therefore replication studies remain an essential part of healthcare research.

Strengths and limitations of this study

  • The same team performed the original study and this replication study

  • The underlying data sources, while similar, had differences that may have affected the results

  • The focus of replication was a single outcome for a single condition and may not generalise to other disease areas

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

The British Heart Foundation Data Science Centre (grant No SP/19/3/34678, awarded to Health Data Research (HDR) UK) funded co-development (with NHS England) of the Secure Data Environment service for England, provision of linked datasets, data access, user software licences, computational usage, and data management and wrangling support, with additional contributions from the HDR UK Data and Connectivity component of the UK Government Chief Scientific Adviser's National Core Studies programme to coordinate national COVID-19 priority research. Consortium partner organisations funded the time of contributing data analysts, biostatisticians, epidemiologists, and clinicians. The associated costs of accessing data in NHS England's Secure Data Environment service for England, for analysts working on this study, were funded by the Data and Connectivity National Core Study, led by Health Data Research UK in partnership with the Office for National Statistics, which is funded by UK Research and Innovation (grant ref: MC_PC_20058). This research was co-funded by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre (NIHR203308) and the NIHR Applied Research Collaboration Greater Manchester (NIHR200174). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The North East - Newcastle and North Tyneside 2 research ethics committee of the Health Research Authority gave ethical approval for this work.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • Reformatted for journal requirements. Added structured abstract, and extra sections such as conflict of interest.

11 Data availability

The data used in this study are available in NHS England’s SDE service for England, but as restrictions apply they are not publicly available (https://digital.nhs.uk/coronavirus/coronavirus-data-services-updates/trusted-research-environment-service-for-england). The CVD-COVID-UK/COVID-IMPACT programme led by the BHF Data Science Centre (https://bhfdatasciencecentre.org) received approval to access data in NHS England’s SDE service for England from the Independent Group Advising on the Release of Data (IGARD) (https://digital.nhs.uk/about-nhs-digital/corporate-information-and-documents/independent-group-advising-on-the-release-of-data) via an application made in the Data Access Request Service (DARS) Online system (ref. DARS-NIC-381078-Y9C5K) (https://digital.nhs.uk/services/data-access-request-service-dars/dars-products-and-services). The CVD-COVID-UK/COVID-IMPACT Approvals & Oversight Board (https://bhfdatasciencecentre.org/areas/cvd-covid-uk-covid-impact/) subsequently granted approval to this project to access the data within NHS England’s SDE service for England. The deidentified data used in this study were made available to accredited researchers only. Those wishing to gain access to the data should contact bhfdsc{at}hdruk.ac.uk in the first instance.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted August 30, 2024.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Replicating a COVID-19 study in a national England database to assess the generalisability of research with regional electronic health record data
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Replicating a COVID-19 study in a national England database to assess the generalisability of research with regional electronic health record data
Richard Williams, David Jenkins, Thomas Bolton, Adrian Heald, Mehrdad A Mizani, Matthew Sperrin, Niels Peek
medRxiv 2024.08.06.24311538; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.06.24311538
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Replicating a COVID-19 study in a national England database to assess the generalisability of research with regional electronic health record data
Richard Williams, David Jenkins, Thomas Bolton, Adrian Heald, Mehrdad A Mizani, Matthew Sperrin, Niels Peek
medRxiv 2024.08.06.24311538; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.06.24311538

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Health Informatics
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (349)
  • Allergy and Immunology (668)
  • Allergy and Immunology (668)
  • Anesthesia (181)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (2648)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (316)
  • Dermatology (223)
  • Emergency Medicine (399)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (942)
  • Epidemiology (12228)
  • Forensic Medicine (10)
  • Gastroenterology (759)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (4103)
  • Geriatric Medicine (387)
  • Health Economics (680)
  • Health Informatics (2657)
  • Health Policy (1005)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (985)
  • Hematology (363)
  • HIV/AIDS (851)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (13695)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (797)
  • Medical Education (399)
  • Medical Ethics (109)
  • Nephrology (436)
  • Neurology (3882)
  • Nursing (209)
  • Nutrition (577)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (739)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (695)
  • Oncology (2030)
  • Ophthalmology (585)
  • Orthopedics (240)
  • Otolaryngology (306)
  • Pain Medicine (250)
  • Palliative Medicine (75)
  • Pathology (473)
  • Pediatrics (1115)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (466)
  • Primary Care Research (452)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (3432)
  • Public and Global Health (6527)
  • Radiology and Imaging (1403)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (814)
  • Respiratory Medicine (871)
  • Rheumatology (409)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (410)
  • Sports Medicine (342)
  • Surgery (448)
  • Toxicology (53)
  • Transplantation (185)
  • Urology (165)