ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2010
Sixteen years of ICPC use in Norwegian primary care: looking through the facts.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biopsychosocial predictors and trajectories of work participation after transdiagnostic occupational rehabilitation of participants with mental and somatic disorders: a cohort study.BMC public health · 2018Trial
- General practitioner utilization by age, sex and disease in Norway from 2012-2023: a national health registry study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2026Article
- How to ensure effective and sustainable ILI surveillance in Belgian general practices? : protocol.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Article
- A universal diagnosis syntax.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Article
- Article
- Association between number of medications and mortality in geriatric inpatients: a Danish nationwide register-based cohort study.European geriatric medicine · 2020Article
- Prescribing antibiotics when the stakes are higher - do GPs prescribe less when patients are pregnant? A retrospective observational study.BJGP open · 2018Article
- Antibiotic prescribing in relation to diagnoses and consultation rates in Belgium, the Netherlands and Sweden: use of European quality indicators.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2017Article
- Role of Patient and Practice Characteristics in Variance of Treatment Quality in Type 2 Diabetes between General Practices.PloS one · 2016Article
- Point-of-care testing with CRP in primary care: a registry-based observational study from Norway.BMC family practice · 2015Observational
- The languages of health in general practice electronic patient records: a Zipf's law analysis.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2014Article
- Do treatment quality indicators predict cardiovascular outcomes in patients with diabetes?PloS one · 2013Article
- Article
- Unlimited access to health care--impact of psychosomatic co-morbidity on utilisation in German general practices.BMC family practice · 2011Article
- A comparison of morbidity patterns in public and private primary care clinics in malaysia.Malaysian family physician : the official journal of the Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia · 2011Article
- Methods to identify the target population: implications for prescribing quality indicators.BMC health services research · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe International Classification for Primary Care (ICPC) standard aims to facilitate simultaneous and longitudinal comparisons of clinical primary care practice within and across country borders; it is also used for administrative purposes. This study evaluates the use of the original ICPC-1 and the more complete ICPC-2 Norwegian versions in electronic patient records.
methodsWe performed a retrospective study of approximately 1.5 million ICPC codes and diagnoses that were collected over a 16-year period at 12 primary care sites in Norway. In the first phase of this period (transition phase, 1992-1999) physicians were allowed to not use an ICPC code in their practice while in the second phase (regular phase, 2000-2008) the use of an ICPC code was mandatory. The ICPC codes and diagnoses defined a problem event for each patient in the PROblem-oriented electronic MEDical record (PROMED). The main outcome measure of our analysis was the percentage of problem events in PROMEDs with inappropriate (or missing) ICPC codes and of diagnoses that did not map the latest ICPC-2 classification. Specific problem areas (pneumonia, anaemia, tonsillitis and diabetes) were examined in the same context.
resultsCodes were missing in 6.2% of the problem events; incorrect codes were observed in 4.0% of the problem events and text mismatch between the diagnoses and the expected ICPC-2 diagnoses text in 53.8% of the problem events. Missing codes were observed only during the transition phase while incorrect and inappropriate codes were used all over the 16-year period. The physicians created diagnoses that did not exist in ICPC. These 'new' diagnoses were used with varying frequency; many of them were used only once. Inappropriate ICPC-2 codes were also observed in the selected problem areas and for both phases.
conclusionsOur results strongly suggest that physicians did not adhere to the ICPC standard due to its incompleteness, i.e. lack of many clinically important diagnoses. This indicates that ICPC is inappropriate for the classification of problem events and the clinical practice in primary care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.