Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22078460›Full record

ArticleBMC ophthalmology2011

Cataract research using electronic health records.

Carol J Waudby, Richard L Berg, James G Linneman, Luke V Rasmussen, Peggy L Peissig, Lin Chen, Catherine A McCarty

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Desiderata for computable representations of electronic health records-driven phenotype algorithms.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2015
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Evaluating the state of the art in disorder recognition and normalization of the clinical narrative.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2015
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Walking and running are associated with similar reductions in cataract risk.Medicine and science in sports and exercise · 2013
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

7 authors.

Carol J WaudbyCenter for Human Genetics, Marshfield Clinic Research Foundation, Marshfield, Wisconsin, USA. waudby.carol@mcrf.mfldclin.edu.
Richard L Berg
James G Linneman
Luke V Rasmussen
Peggy L Peissig
Lin Chen
Catherine A McCarty

Funding

Genome-Wide Study of Cataract and Low HDL in the Personalized Medicine Research PU01HG004608 · NHGRI · MARSHFIELD CLINIC RESEARCH FOUNDATION · PI MCCARTY, CATHERINE ANNE · 2007 to 2010
$3.3M
NHGRI NIH HHS 1U01HG004608
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe eMERGE (electronic MEdical Records and Genomics) network, funded by the National Human Genome Research Institute, is a national consortium formed to develop, disseminate, and apply approaches to research that combine DNA biorepositories with electronic health record (EHR) systems for large-scale, high-throughput genetic research. Marshfield Clinic is one of five sites in the eMERGE network and primarily studied: 1) age-related cataract and 2) HDL-cholesterol levels. The purpose of this paper is to describe the approach to electronic evaluation of the epidemiology of cataract using the EHR for a large biobank and to assess previously identified epidemiologic risk factors in cases identified by electronic algorithms.

methodsElectronic algorithms were used to select individuals with cataracts in the Personalized Medicine Research Project database. These were analyzed for cataract prevalence, age at cataract, and previously identified risk factors.

resultsCataract diagnoses and surgeries, though not type of cataract, were successfully identified using electronic algorithms. Age specific prevalence of both cataract (22% compared to 17.2%) and cataract surgery (11% compared to 5.1%) were higher when compared to the Eye Diseases Prevalence Research Group. The risk factors of age, gender, diabetes, and steroid use were confirmed.

conclusionsUsing electronic health records can be a viable and efficient tool to identify cataracts for research. However, using retrospective data from this source can be confounded by historical limits on data availability, differences in the utilization of healthcare, and changes in exposures over time.

Indexed as

Databases, Nucleic AcidElectronic Health RecordsAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge of OnsetAlgorithmsCataractCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrevalenceRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID22078460
PMCPMC3226674

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.