Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26306285›Full record

ArticleAMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science2015

Automating Identification of Multiple Chronic Conditions in Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Tiffany I Leung, Hawre Jalal, Donna M Zulman, Michel Dumontier, Douglas K Owens, Mark A Musen, Mary K Goldstein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. High-Risk Drug-Drug Interactions Between Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Chronic Conditions.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2017
    Article
  3. 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.

Tiffany I LeungDepartment of Veterans Affairs, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA ; Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA ; Division of General Medical Disciplines, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Hawre JalalDepartment of Veterans Affairs, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA ; Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Donna M ZulmanDepartment of Veterans Affairs, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA ; Division of General Medical Disciplines, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Michel DumontierStanford Center for Biomedical Informatics Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Douglas K OwensDepartment of Veterans Affairs, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA ; Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Mark A MusenStanford Center for Biomedical Informatics Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Mary K GoldsteinDepartment of Veterans Affairs, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA ; Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are intended to provide evidence-based guidance to clinicians on a single disease, and are frequently considered inadequate when caring for patients with multiple chronic conditions (MCC), or two or more chronic conditions. It is unclear to what degree disease-specific CPGs provide guidance about MCC. In this study, we develop a method for extracting knowledge from single-disease chronic condition CPGs to determine how frequently they mention commonly co-occurring chronic diseases. We focus on 15 highly prevalent chronic conditions. We use publicly available resources, including a repository of guideline summaries from the National Guideline Clearinghouse to build a text corpus, a data dictionary of ICD-9 codes from the Medicare Chronic Conditions Data Warehouse (CCW) to construct an initial list of disease terms, and disease synonyms from the National Center for Biomedical Ontology to enhance the list of disease terms. First, for each disease guideline, we determined the frequency of comorbid condition mentions (a disease-comorbidity pair) by exactly matching disease synonyms in the text corpus. Then, we developed an annotated reference standard using a sample subset of guidelines. We used this reference standard to evaluate our approach. Then, we compared the co-prevalence of common pairs of chronic conditions from Medicare CCW data to the frequency of disease-comorbidity pairs in CPGs. Our results show that some disease-comorbidity pairs occur more frequently in CPGs than others. Sixty-one (29.0%) of 210 possible disease-comorbidity pairs occurred zero times; for example, no guideline on chronic kidney disease mentioned depression, while heart failure guidelines mentioned ischemic heart disease the most frequently. Our method adequately identifies comorbid chronic conditions in CPG recommendations with precision 0.82, recall 0.75, and F-measure 0.78. Our work identifies knowledge currently embedded in the free text of clinical practice guideline recommendations and provides an initial view of the extent to which CPGs mention common comorbid conditions. Knowledge extracted from CPG text in this way may be useful to inform gaps in guideline recommendations regarding MCC and therefore identify potential opportunities for guideline improvement.

Identifiers

PMID26306285
PMCPMC4525235

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.