A Comparison of Data Quality Frameworks: A Review

This study reviews various data quality frameworks that have some form of regulatory backing. The aim is to identify how these frameworks define, measure, and apply data quality dimensions. This review identified generalisable frameworks, such as TDQM, ISO 8000, and ISO 25012, and specialised frameworks, such as IMF’s DQAF, BCBS 239, WHO’s DQA, and ALCOA+. A standardised data quality model was employed to map the dimensions of the data from each framework to a common vocabulary. This mapping enabled a gap analysis that highlights the presence or absence of specific data quality dimensions across the examined frameworks. The analysis revealed that core data quality dimensions such as “accuracy”, “completeness”, “consistency”, and “timeliness” are equally and well represented across all frameworks. In contrast, dimensions such as “semantics” and “quantity” were found to be overlooked by most frameworks, despite their growing impact for data practitioners as tools such as knowledge graphs become more common. Frameworks tailored to specific domains were also found to include fewer overall data quality dimensions but contained dimensions that were absent from more general frameworks, highlighting the need for a standardised approach that incorporates both established and emerging data quality dimensions. This work condenses information on commonly used and regulation-backed data quality frameworks, allowing practitioners to develop tools and applications to apply these frameworks that are compliant with standards and regulations. The bibliometric analysis from this review emphasises the importance of adopting a comprehensive quality framework to enhance governance, ensure regulatory compliance, and improve decision-making processes in data-rich environments.