Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28142051›Full record

ArticleJournal of epidemiology2017

Validity of diagnoses, procedures, and laboratory data in Japanese administrative data.

Hayato Yamana, Mutsuko Moriwaki, Hiromasa Horiguchi, Mariko Kodan, Kiyohide Fushimi, Hideo Yasunaga

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of epidemiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 428 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
428citing papers in PubMed
–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

428 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Patient characteristics and the safety of stent placement for malignant vena cava syndrome in Japan: a nationwide analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Prediction model for aortic dissection, aortic aneurysm, and peripheral artery disease.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

368 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Hayato YamanaDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Health Economics, School of Public Health, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan; Department of Clinical Data Management and Research, Clinical Research Center, National Hospital Organization Headquarters, Tokyo, Japan. Electronic address: yamana-tky@umin.ac.jp.
Mutsuko MoriwakiDepartment of Clinical Data Management and Research, Clinical Research Center, National Hospital Organization Headquarters, Tokyo, Japan; Quality Management Center, Medical Hospital, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan.
Hiromasa HoriguchiDepartment of Clinical Data Management and Research, Clinical Research Center, National Hospital Organization Headquarters, Tokyo, Japan.
Mariko KodanDepartment of Clinical Data Management and Research, Clinical Research Center, National Hospital Organization Headquarters, Tokyo, Japan; Department of Health Policy and Informatics, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Kiyohide FushimiDepartment of Clinical Data Management and Research, Clinical Research Center, National Hospital Organization Headquarters, Tokyo, Japan; Quality Management Center, Medical Hospital, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan; Department of Health Policy and Informatics, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Hideo YasunagaDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Health Economics, School of Public Health, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundValidation of recorded data is a prerequisite for studies that utilize administrative databases. The present study evaluated the validity of diagnoses and procedure records in the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination (DPC) data, along with laboratory test results in the newly-introduced Standardized Structured Medical Record Information Exchange (SS-MIX) data.

methodsBetween November 2015 and February 2016, we conducted chart reviews of 315 patients hospitalized between April 2014 and March 2015 in four middle-sized acute-care hospitals in Shizuoka, Kochi, Fukuoka, and Saga Prefectures and used them as reference standards. The sensitivity and specificity of DPC data in identifying 16 diseases and 10 common procedures were identified. The accuracy of SS-MIX data for 13 laboratory test results was also examined.

resultsThe specificity of diagnoses in the DPC data exceeded 96%, while the sensitivity was below 50% for seven diseases and variable across diseases. When limited to primary diagnoses, the sensitivity and specificity were 78.9% and 93.2%, respectively. The sensitivity of procedure records exceeded 90% for six procedures, and the specificity exceeded 90% for nine procedures. Agreement between the SS-MIX data and the chart reviews was above 95% for all 13 items.

conclusionThe validity of diagnoses and procedure records in the DPC data and laboratory results in the SS-MIX data was high in general, supporting their use in future studies.

Indexed as

Clinical Laboratory TechniquesMedical RecordsDatabases, FactualHumansJapanReproducibility of ResultsAdministrative dataDiagnosisLaboratory dataProcedureValidation

Identifiers

PMID28142051
PMCPMC5602797

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.