ArticlePharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2016
Validation of a coding algorithm for intra-abdominal surgeries and adhesion-related complications in an electronic medical records database.
Article in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2016. 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Identification of validated case definitions for medical conditions used in primary care electronic medical record databases: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018Pooled it
- Association Between Statin Use at the Time of Intra-abdominal Surgery and Postoperative Adhesion-Related Complications and Small-Bowel Obstruction.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Development and Validation of an Administrative Codes Algorithm to Identify Abdominal Surgery and Bowel Obstruction in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Crohn's & colitis 360 · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeEpidemiological data on adhesion-related complications following intra-abdominal surgery are limited. We tested the accuracy of recording of these surgeries and complications within The Health Improvement Network (THIN), a primary care database within the UK.
methodsIndividuals within THIN from 1995 to 2011 with an incident intra-abdominal surgery and subsequent bowel obstruction (SBO) or adhesiolysis were identified using diagnostic codes. To compute positive predictive values (PPVs), requests were sent to treating physicians of patients with these diagnostic codes to confirm the surgery, SBO, or adhesiolysis code. Completeness of recording was estimated by comparing observed surgical rates within THIN to expected rates derived from the Hospital Episode Statistics dataset within England. Cumulative incidence rates of adhesion-related complications at 5 years were compared with a previously published cohort within Scotland.
resultsTwo hundred seventeen of 245 (89%) questionnaires were returned (180 SBO and 37 adhesiolysis). The PPV of codes for surgery was 94.5% (95%CI: 91-97%). The 88.8% of procedure types were correctly coded. The PPV for SBO and adhesiolysis was 86.1% (95%CI: 80-91%) and 89.2% (95%CI: 75-97%), respectively. Colectomy, appendectomy, and cholecystectomy rates within THIN were 99%, 95%, and 84% of rates observed in national Hospital Episode Statistics data, respectively. Cumulative incidence rates of adhesion related complications following colectomy, appendectomy, and small bowel surgery were similar to those published previously.
conclusionsSurgical procedures, SBO, and adhesiolysis can be accurately identified within THIN using diagnostic codes. THIN represents a new tool for assessing patient-specific risk factors for adhesion-related complications and long-term outcomes.
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.