Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26297364›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2015

Accessing primary care Big Data: the development of a software algorithm to explore the rich content of consultation records.

J MacRae, B Darlow, L McBain, O Jones, M Stubbe, N Turner, A Dowell

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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.

J MacRaePatients First, Wellington, New Zealand.
B DarlowDepartment of Primary Health Care and General Practice, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
L McBainDepartment of Primary Health Care and General Practice, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
O JonesCompass Health Wellington Trust, Wellington, New Zealand.
M StubbeDepartment of Primary Health Care and General Practice, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
N TurnerDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
A DowellDepartment of Primary Health Care and General Practice, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo develop a natural language processing software inference algorithm to classify the content of primary care consultations using electronic health record Big Data and subsequently test the algorithm's ability to estimate the prevalence and burden of childhood respiratory illness in primary care.

designAlgorithm development and validation study. To classify consultations, the algorithm is designed to interrogate clinical narrative entered as free text, diagnostic (Read) codes created and medications prescribed on the day of the consultation.

settingThirty-six consenting primary care practices from a mixed urban and semirural region of New Zealand. Three independent sets of 1200 child consultation records were randomly extracted from a data set of all general practitioner consultations in participating practices between 1 January 2008-31 December 2013 for children under 18 years of age (n=754,242). Each consultation record within these sets was independently classified by two expert clinicians as respiratory or non-respiratory, and subclassified according to respiratory diagnostic categories to create three 'gold standard' sets of classified records. These three gold standard record sets were used to train, test and validate the algorithm. OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and F-measure were calculated to illustrate the algorithm's ability to replicate judgements of expert clinicians within the 1200 record gold standard validation set.

resultsThe algorithm was able to identify respiratory consultations in the 1200 record validation set with a sensitivity of 0.72 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.78) and a specificity of 0.95 (95% CI 0.93 to 0.98). The positive predictive value of algorithm respiratory classification was 0.93 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.97). The positive predictive value of the algorithm classifying consultations as being related to specific respiratory diagnostic categories ranged from 0.68 (95% CI 0.40 to 1.00; other respiratory conditions) to 0.91 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.00; throat infections).

conclusionsA software inference algorithm that uses primary care Big Data can accurately classify the content of clinical consultations. This algorithm will enable accurate estimation of the prevalence of childhood respiratory illness in primary care and resultant service utilisation. The methodology can also be applied to other areas of clinical care.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsSoftwareAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleNatural Language ProcessingNew ZealandOutcome Assessment, Health CarePrimary Health CareReferral and ConsultationPRIMARY CARE

Identifiers

PMID26297364
PMCPMC4550741

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.