Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25709502›Full record

ArticleClinical epidemiology2015

Positive predictive values of the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision diagnoses of Gram-negative septicemia/sepsis and urosepsis for presence of Gram-negative bacteremia.

Kirstine Kobberøe Søgaard, Reimar Wernich Thomsen, Henrik Carl Schønheyder, Mette Søgaard

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Accuracy ofCritical care explorations · 2022
    Review
  6. Article
  7. A simple measure to improve sepsis documentation and coding.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kirstine Kobberøe SøgaardDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Reimar Wernich ThomsenDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Henrik Carl SchønheyderDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark ; Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
Mette SøgaardDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Aarhus University Hospital · DKAalborg University · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth care databases are a valuable resource for infectious disease epidemiology if diagnoses are accurately coded. We examined the ability of diagnostic coding to accurately identify Gram-negative bacteremia.

methodsWe randomly selected 100 patients among 1,703 patients recorded in the Danish National Patient Register with a diagnosis of either "septicemia/sepsis due to other Gram-negative organisms" (International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision [ICD-10] code A41.5) or "urosepsis" (ICD-10 code A41.9B) who had been admitted at Aalborg University Hospital, Denmark between 1994 and 2012. We estimated the positive predictive value (PPV) of these diagnoses for presence of Gram-negative bacteremia, using microbiological results from blood cultures as standard reference. Complementary clinical information was obtained from the medical records.

resultsOf the 100 patients registered with Gram-negative septicemia/sepsis or urosepsis, 72 had blood culture confirmed Gram-negative bacteremia, four patients had monomicrobial Gram-positive bacteremia, 21 patients had a negative blood culture, and three had no blood culture taken. The overall PPV of a blood culture confirmed Gram-negative bacteremia diagnosis was 72% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 62%-81%); for ICD-10 code A41.5 it was 86% (95% CI: 74%-94%) and for ICD-10 code A41.9B it was 55% (95% CI: 39%-70%). The highest PPV was achieved for diagnoses registered in the most recent calendar period (2009-2012) and for secondary discharge diagnoses.

conclusionOur findings indicated good agreement between ICD-10 code A41.5 "septicemia/sepsis due to other Gram-negative organisms" and Gram-negative bacteremia, whereas ICD-10 code A41.9B "urosepsis" was not suited for identification of Gram-negative bacteremia.

Indexed as

Danish National Patient Registervalidation studies

Identifiers

PMID25709502
PMCPMC4334314
OpenAlexW2045532499

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.