ArticleClinical epidemiology2012
Challenges in validating quality of care data in a schizophrenia registry: experience from the Danish National Indicator Project.
Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association between Global Assessment of Functioning scores and indicators of functioning, severity, and prognosis in first-time schizophrenia.Clinical epidemiology · 2016Article
- The Danish Schizophrenia Registry.Clinical epidemiology · 2016Review
- Improving quality of care among patients hospitalised with schizophrenia: a nationwide initiative.BJPsych open · 2015Article
- Data quality in the Danish National Acute Leukemia Registry: a hematological data resource.Clinical epidemiology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImprovement of quality of care for psychiatric patients is a key objective of health care systems worldwide. Consequently, there is an increasing interest in documenting quality of care; however, little is known about the validity of the available data on psychiatric care.
objectiveTo assess the validity of process of care data recorded in the Danish National Indicator Project (DNIP), a national population-based registry containing quality of care data of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia in Denmark.
methodsA random sample of 1% of patients with schizophrenia registered in the DNIP between 2004 and 2009 (111 inpatient and 85 outpatient) was identified for validation. Medical records for these patients, which were used as the gold standard, were retrieved and reviewed for information on the processes of care received. Agreement between the data in the DNIP and the medical records were assessed by computing sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values.
resultsThe agreement between the recorded processes of care in the DNIP and in the medical records varied substantially across the individual process of care variables. However, a collection of the processes of care demonstrated a high agreement (80% or more) between data in the DNIP and the medical records, according to all examined aspects of data validity (sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values). The medical records contained varying levels of missing information regarding the processes of care, from 1% for antipsychotic medication prescription to 54% for psychoeducation.
conclusionCurrent documentation practices in Danish psychiatric hospitals appear to be inconsistent and may preclude the use of psychiatric medical records as the gold standard when validating registry data.
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.