ArticlePloS one2016
Incidence of Appendicitis over Time: A Comparative Analysis of an Administrative Healthcare Database and a Pathology-Proven Appendicitis Registry.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.
- Abdominal drainage to prevent intraperitoneal abscess after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Abdominal drainage to prevent intra-peritoneal abscess after appendectomy for complicated appendicitis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Trial
- Global Incidence of Appendectomy: A Population-Based Study of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026Article
- Timing of laparoscopic appendectomy and impacts on outcomes: A retrospective study of patients across in-hours, after-hours and holidays.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2026Article
- The rate of complicated appendicitis during a nonpharmaceutical intervention in two territories with different COVID-19 incidence.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Progress in the application of machine learning in CT diagnosis of acute appendicitis.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Review
- Acute appendicitis in patients suffering from Immunocompromising hematologic malignancies or chemotherapy-related leukopenia: a cohort study.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Early versus delayed appendicectomy for appendiceal phlegmon or abscess.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Review
- Development of a nomogram for the prediction of complicated appendicitis during pregnancy.BMC surgery · 2023Article
- Article
- Hyperbilirubinemia and Hyponatremia as Predictors of Complicated Appendicitis.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Pre-Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pediatric Acute Appendicitis: Risk Factors Model and Diagnosis Modality in a Developing Low-Income Country.Pediatric gastroenterology, hepatology & nutrition · 2022Article
- Hospitalization Trends for Acute Appendicitis in Spain, 1998 to 2017.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Observational
- The Worldwide Epidemiology of Acute Appendicitis: An Analysis of the Global Health Data Exchange Dataset.World journal of surgery · 2021Article
- Determining acute complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis using serum and urine biomarkers: interleukin-6 and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin.Pediatric surgery international · 2020Article
- A 30-day prospective audit of all inpatient complications following acute care surgery: How well do we really perform?Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie · 2020Article
- Correlation of clinical decision-making with probability of disease: A web-based study among general practitioners.PloS one · 2020Article
- Evaluation of the Potential Association of Platelet Levels, Mean Platelet Volume and Platelet Distribution Width with Acute Appendicitis.Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences · 2019Article
- Management of Appendicitis Globally Based on Income of Countries (MAGIC) Study.World journal of surgery · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
importanceAt the turn of the 21st century, studies evaluating the change in incidence of appendicitis over time have reported inconsistent findings.
objectivesWe compared the differences in the incidence of appendicitis derived from a pathology registry versus an administrative database in order to validate coding in administrative databases and establish temporal trends in the incidence of appendicitis.
designWe conducted a population-based comparative cohort study to identify all individuals with appendicitis from 2000 to2008. SETTING &
participantsTwo population-based data sources were used to identify cases of appendicitis: 1) a pathology registry (n = 8,822); and 2) a hospital discharge abstract database (n = 10,453). INTERVENTION & MAIN OUTCOME: The administrative database was compared to the pathology registry for the following a priori analyses: 1) to calculate the positive predictive value (PPV) of administrative codes; 2) to compare the annual incidence of appendicitis; and 3) to assess differences in temporal trends. Temporal trends were assessed using a generalized linear model that assumed a Poisson distribution and reported as an annual percent change (APC) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Analyses were stratified by perforated and non-perforated appendicitis.
resultsThe administrative database (PPV = 83.0%) overestimated the incidence of appendicitis (100.3 per 100,000) when compared to the pathology registry (84.2 per 100,000). Codes for perforated appendicitis were not reliable (PPV = 52.4%) leading to overestimation in the incidence of perforated appendicitis in the administrative database (34.8 per 100,000) as compared to the pathology registry (19.4 per 100,000). The incidence of appendicitis significantly increased over time in both the administrative database (APC = 2.1%; 95% CI: 1.3, 2.8) and pathology registry (APC = 4.1; 95% CI: 3.1, 5.0). CONCLUSION & RELEVANCE: The administrative database overestimated the incidence of appendicitis, particularly among perforated appendicitis. Therefore, studies utilizing administrative data to analyze perforated appendicitis should be interpreted cautiously.
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.