Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26759847›Full record

ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2015

Identifying patients with asthma in primary care electronic medical record systems Chart analysis-based electronic algorithm validation study.

Nancy Xi, Rebecca Wallace, Gina Agarwal, David Chan, Andrea Gershon, Samir Gupta

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

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

  1. Electronic health record data quality assessment and tools: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Update on the genetics of allergic diseases.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2025
    Review
  4. Validation of adult asthma case definitions for primary care sentinel surveillance.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2023
    Article
  5. Primary care asthma surveillance: a review of knowledge translation tools and strategies for quality improvement.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Automated identification of an aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease cohort.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2017
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Nancy Xi
Rebecca Wallace
Gina Agarwal
David Chan
Andrea Gershon
Samir Gupta

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo develop and test a variety of electronic medical record (EMR) search algorithms to allow clinicians to accurately identify their patients with asthma in order to enable improved care.

designA retrospective chart analysis identified 5 relevant unique EMR information fields (electronic disease registry, cumulative patient profile, billing diagnostic code, medications, and chart notes); asthma-related search terms were designated for each field. The accuracy of each term was tested for its ability to identify the asthma patients among all patients whose charts were reviewed. Increasingly sophisticated search algorithms were then designed and evaluated by serially combining individual searches with Boolean operators.

settingTwo large academic primary care clinics in Hamilton, Ont.

participantsCharts for 600 randomly selected patients aged 16 years and older identified in an initial EMR search as likely having asthma (n = 150), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (n = 150), other respiratory conditions (n = 150), or nonrespiratory conditions (n = 150) were reviewed until 100 patients per category were identified (or until all available names were exhausted). A total of 398 charts were reviewed in full and included.

main outcome measuresSensitivity and specificity of each search for asthma diagnosis (against the reference standard of a physician chart review-based diagnosis).

resultsTwo physicians reviewed the charts identified in the initial EMR search using a standardized data collection form and ascribed the following diagnoses in 398 patients: 112 (28.1%) had asthma, 81 (20.4%) had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 104 (26.1%) had other respiratory conditions, and 101 (25.4%) had nonrespiratory conditions. Concordance between reviewers in chart abstraction diagnosis was high (κ = 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.97). Overall, the algorithm searching for patients who had asthma in their cumulative patient profiles or for whom an asthma billing code had been used was the most accurate (sensitivity of 90.2%, 95% CI 87.3% to 93.1%; specificity of 83.9%, 95% CI 80.3% to 87.5%).

conclusionUsable, practical search algorithms that accurately identify patients with asthma in existing EMRs are presented. Clinicians can apply 1 of these algorithms to generate asthma registries for targeted quality improvement initiatives and outcome measurements. This methodology can be emulated for other diseases.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsData AccuracyAdultAgedAsthmaElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOntarioPrimary Health CarePulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveRegistriesRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID26759847
PMCPMC4607352

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.