ArticleJournal of nuclear medicine technology2012
Development of a relational database to capture and merge clinical history with the quantitative results of radionuclide renography.
Article in Journal of nuclear medicine technology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Personalization and Patient Involvement in Decision Support Systems: Current Trends.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2015Review
- Computer-assisted diagnosis in renal nuclear medicine: rationale, methodology, and interpretative criteria for diuretic renography.Seminars in nuclear medicine · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
unlabelledOur objective was to design and implement a clinical history database capable of linking to our database of quantitative results from (99m)Tc-mercaptoacetyltriglycine (MAG3) renal scans and export a data summary for physicians or our software decision support system.
methodsFor database development, we used a commercial program. Additional software was developed in Interactive Data Language. MAG3 studies were processed using an in-house enhancement of a commercial program. The relational database has 3 parts: a list of all renal scans (the RENAL database), a set of patients with quantitative processing results (the Q2 database), and a subset of patients from Q2 containing clinical data manually transcribed from the hospital information system (the CLINICAL database). To test interobserver variability, a second physician transcriber reviewed 50 randomly selected patients in the hospital information system and tabulated 2 clinical data items: hydronephrosis and presence of a current stent. The CLINICAL database was developed in stages and contains 342 fields comprising demographic information, clinical history, and findings from up to 11 radiologic procedures. A scripted algorithm is used to reliably match records present in both Q2 and CLINICAL. An Interactive Data Language program then combines data from the 2 databases into an XML (extensible markup language) file for use by the decision support system. A text file is constructed and saved for review by physicians.
resultsRENAL contains 2,222 records, Q2 contains 456 records, and CLINICAL contains 152 records. The interobserver variability testing found a 95% match between the 2 observers for presence or absence of ureteral stent (κ = 0.52), a 75% match for hydronephrosis based on narrative summaries of hospitalizations and clinical visits (κ = 0.41), and a 92% match for hydronephrosis based on the imaging report (κ = 0.84).
conclusionWe have developed a relational database system to integrate the quantitative results of MAG3 image processing with clinical records obtained from the hospital information system. We also have developed a methodology for formatting clinical history for review by physicians and export to a decision support system. We identified several pitfalls, including the fact that important textual information extracted from the hospital information system by knowledgeable transcribers can show substantial interobserver variation, particularly when record retrieval is based on the narrative clinical records.
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.