Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20931099›Full record

ReviewThe Canadian journal of cardiology2010

Administrative data have high variation in validity for recording heart failure.

Susan Quach, Claudia Blais, Hude Quan

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The Canadian journal of cardiology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 73 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

73 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Prevalence of heart failure in Australia: a systematic review.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2016 · on this map
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Susan QuachDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Claudia Blais
Hude Quan

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany studies have relied on administrative data to identify patients with heart failure (HF).

objectiveTo systematically review studies that assessed the validity of administrative data for recording HF.

methodsEnglish peer-reviewed articles (1990 to 2008) validating International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-8, -9 and -10 codes from administrative data were included. An expert panel determined which ICD codes should be included to define HF. Frequencies of ICD codes for HF were calculated using up to the 16 diagnostic coding fields available in the Canadian hospital discharge abstract during fiscal years 2000⁄2001 and 2005⁄2006.

resultsBetween 1992 and 2008, more than 70 different ICD codes for defining HF were used in 25 published studies. Twenty-one studies validated hospital discharge abstract data; three studies validated physician claims and two studies validated ambulatory care data. Eighteen studies reported sensitivity (range 29% to 89%). Specificity and negative predictive value were greater than 70% across 17 studies. Nineteen studies reported positive predictive values (range 12% to 100%). Ten studies reported kappa values (range 0.39 to 0.84). For Canadian hospital discharge data, ICD-9 and -10 codes 428 and I50 identified HF in 5.50% and 4.80% of discharge records, respectively. Additional HF-related ICD-9 and -10 codes did not impact HF prevalence.

conclusionThe ICD-9 and -10 codes 428 and I50 were the most commonly used to define HF in hospital discharge data. Validity of administrative data in recording HF varied across the studies and data sources that were assessed.

Indexed as

Quality Indicators, Health CareForms and Records ControlGlobal HealthHeart FailureHumansInternational Classification of DiseasesMedical RecordsMedical Records Department, HospitalReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID20931099
PMCPMC2954539

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.