ArticleBMJ open2016
Optimising case detection within UK electronic health records: use of multiple linked databases for detecting liver injury.
Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of allopurinol on thiopurine associated toxicity: A retrospective population-based cohort study.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2021Article
- Electronic Medical Record-Based Case Phenotyping for the Charlson Conditions: Scoping Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2021Article
- Identifying children with Cystic Fibrosis in population-scale routinely collected data in Wales: A Retrospective Review.International journal of population data science · 2020Article
- Empowering knowledge generation through international data network: the IMeCCHI-DATANETWORK.International journal of population data science · 2020Article
- The accuracy of date of death recording in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD database in England compared with the Office for National Statistics death registrations.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2019Article
- Integrating electronic healthcare records of armed forces personnel: Developing a framework for evaluating health outcomes in England, Scotland and Wales.International journal of medical informatics · 2018Article
- Quantification of the risk of liver injury associated with flucloxacillin: a UK population-based cohort study.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2017Article
- Validation of asthma recording in electronic health records: protocol for a systematic review.BMJ open · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesWe aimed to create a 'multidatabase' algorithm for identification of cholestatic liver injury using multiple linked UK databases, before (1) assessing the improvement in case ascertainment compared to using a single database and (2) developing a new single-database case-definition algorithm, validated against the multidatabase algorithm.
designMethod development for case ascertainment.
settingThree UK population-based electronic health record databases: the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), the UK Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES) database and the UK Office of National Statistics (ONS) mortality database.
participants16 040 people over the age of 18 years with linked CPRD-HES records indicating potential cholestatic liver injury between 1 January 2000 and 1 January 2013. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) The number of cases of cholestatic liver injury detected by the multidatabase algorithm. (2) The relative contribution of each data source to multidatabase case status. (3) The ability of the new single-database algorithm to discriminate multidatabase algorithm case status.
resultsWithin the multidatabase case identification algorithm, 4033 of 16 040 potential cases (25%) were identified as definite cases based on CPRD data. HES data allowed possible cases to be discriminated from unlikely cases (947 of 16 040, 6%), but only facilitated identification of 1 definite case. ONS data did not contribute to case definition. The new single-database (CPRD-only) algorithm had a very good ability to discriminate multidatabase case status (area under the receiver operator characteristic curve 0.95).
conclusionsCPRD-HES-ONS linkage confers minimal improvement in cholestatic liver injury case ascertainment compared to using CPRD data alone, and a multidatabase algorithm provides little additional information for validation of a CPRD-only algorithm. The availability of laboratory test results within CPRD but not HES means that algorithms based on CPRD-HES-linked data may not always be merited for studies of liver injury, or for other outcomes relying primarily on laboratory test results.
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.