OBJECTIVE: We extended a 2013 literature review on electronic health record (EHR) data quality assessment approaches and tools to determine recent improvements or changes in EHR data quality assessment methodologies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We completed a systematic review of PubMed articles from 2013 to April 2023 that discussed the quality assessment of EHR data. We screened and reviewed papers for the dimensions and methods defined in the original 2013 manuscript. We categorized papers as data quality outcomes of interest, tools, or opinion pieces. We abstracted and defined additional themes and methods though an iterative review process. RESULTS: We included 103 papers in the review, of which 73 were data quality outcomes of interest papers, 22 were tools, and 8 were opinion pieces. The most common dimension of data quality assessed was completeness, followed by correctness, concordance, plausibility, and currency. We abstracted conformance and bias as 2 additional dimensions of data quality and structural agreement as an additional methodology. DISCUSSION: There has been an increase in EHR data quality assessment publications since the original 2013 review. Consistent dimensions of EHR data quality continue to be assessed across applications. Despite consistent patterns of assessment, there still does not exist a standard approach for assessing EHR data quality. CONCLUSION: Guidelines are needed for EHR data quality assessment to improve the efficiency, transparency, comparability, and interoperability of data quality assessment. These guidelines must be both scalable and flexible. Automation could be helpful in generalizing this process.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1730-1740
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA
Issue number10
StatePublished - Sep 25 2023


  • clinical research informatics
  • data quality
  • electronic health records


Dive into the research topics of 'Electronic health record data quality assessment and tools: a systematic review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this