ArticlePloS one2013
Optimising use of electronic health records to describe the presentation of rheumatoid arthritis in primary care: a strategy for developing code lists.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed.
- A multivariable prediction model to identify anti-CCP positive people in those with non-specific musculoskeletal symptoms in primary care.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Trial
- How do general practitioners diagnose and refer potential rheumatic musculoskeletal complaints? A scoping review.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Article
- An automation framework for clinical codelist development validated with UK data from patients with multiple long-term conditions.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Article
- Management of Rheumatoid Arthritis in Primary Care: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- How data science and AI-based technologies impact genomics.Singapore medical journal · 2023Review
- A literature review on the analysis of symptom-based clinical pathways: Time for a different approach?PLOS digital health · 2022Article
- Electronic Medical Record-Based Case Phenotyping for the Charlson Conditions: Scoping Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2021Article
- Article
- Toward the Development of Data Governance Standards for Using Clinical Free-Text Data in Health Research: Position Paper.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- The Secure Anonymised Information Linkage databank Dementia e-cohort (SAIL-DeC).International journal of population data science · 2020Article
- Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer and the Risk of Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Population-Based Cohort Study.Drug safety · 2019Article
- Coding algorithms for defining Charlson and Elixhauser co-morbidities in Read-coded databases.BMC medical research methodology · 2019Article
- Predictors and temporal trend of flu vaccination in auto-immune rheumatic diseases in the UK: a nationwide prospective cohort study.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2018Article
- Advances in Electronic Phenotyping: From Rule-Based Definitions to Machine Learning Models.Annual review of biomedical data science · 2018Article
- Rheumatoid arthritis and excess mortality: down but not out. A primary care cohort study using data from Clinical Practice Research Datalink.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2018Article
- Identifying clinical features in primary care electronic health record studies: methods for codelist development.BMJ open · 2017Article
- Empirical advances with text mining of electronic health records.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2017Article
- Rheumatoid arthritis is getting less frequent-results of a nationwide population-based cohort study.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2017Article
- An external validation of models to predict the onset of chronic kidney disease using population-based electronic health records from Salford, UK.BMC medicine · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundResearch using electronic health records (EHRs) relies heavily on coded clinical data. Due to variation in coding practices, it can be difficult to aggregate the codes for a condition in order to define cases. This paper describes a methodology to develop 'indicator markers' found in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA); these are a broader range of codes which may allow a probabilistic case definition to use in cases where no diagnostic code is yet recorded.
methodsWe examined EHRs of 5,843 patients in the General Practice Research Database, aged ≥ 30 y, with a first coded diagnosis of RA between 2005 and 2008. Lists of indicator markers for RA were developed initially by panels of clinicians drawing up code-lists and then modified based on scrutiny of available data. The prevalence of indicator markers, and their temporal relationship to RA codes, was examined in patients from 3 y before to 14 d after recorded RA diagnosis.
findingsIndicator markers were common throughout EHRs of RA patients, with 83.5% having 2 or more markers. 34% of patients received a disease-specific prescription before RA was coded; 42% had a referral to rheumatology, and 63% had a test for rheumatoid factor. 65% had at least one joint symptom or sign recorded and in 44% this was at least 6-months before recorded RA diagnosis.
conclusionIndicator markers of RA may be valuable for case definition in cases which do not yet have a diagnostic code. The clinical diagnosis of RA is likely to occur some months before it is coded, shown by markers frequently occurring ≥ 6 months before recorded diagnosis. It is difficult to differentiate delay in diagnosis from delay in recording. Information concealed in free text may be required for the accurate identification of patients and to assess the quality of care in general practice.
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.