Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28209197›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2017

Accuracy and generalizability of using automated methods for identifying adverse events from electronic health record data: a validation study protocol.

Christian M Rochefort, David L Buckeridge, Andréanne Tanguay, Alain Biron, Frédérick D'Aragon, Shengrui Wang, Benoit Gallix, Louis Valiquette, Li-Anne Audet, Todd C Lee and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. New antibiotics for Gram-negative pneumonia.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2022
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Christian M RochefortSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Sherbrooke, 3001, 12e Avenue Nord, Sherbrooke, QC, J1H 5N4, Canada. Christian.Rochefort@usherbrooke.ca.
David L BuckeridgeDepartment of Epidemiology, Biostatics and Occupational Health, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Purvis Hall, 1020 Pine Avenue West, Montreal, QC, H3A 1A2, Canada.
Andréanne TanguaySchool of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Sherbrooke, 3001, 12e Avenue Nord, Sherbrooke, QC, J1H 5N4, Canada.
Alain BironDepartment of Quality, Patient Safety and Performance, McGill University Health Centre, 2155 Guy Street, Montreal, QC, H3H 2R9, Canada.
Frédérick D'AragonDepartment of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Sherbrooke and Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke, 3001, 12e Avenue Nord, Sherbrooke, QC, J1H 5N4, Canada.
Shengrui WangFaculty of Sciences, Department of Informatics, University of Sherbrooke, 2500 Boulevard de l'Université, Sherbrooke, QC, J1K 2R1, Canada.
Benoit GallixDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, McGill University and McGill University Health Centre, 1650 Cedar Avenue, Montreal, QC, H3G 1A4, Canada.
Louis ValiquetteDepartment of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, University of Sherbrooke and Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke, 3001, 12e Avenue Nord, Sherbrooke, QC, J1H 5N4, Canada.
Li-Anne AudetSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Sherbrooke, 3001, 12e Avenue Nord, Sherbrooke, QC, J1H 5N4, Canada.
Todd C LeeDepartment of Internal Medicine, McGill University and McGill University Health Centre, 1650 Cedar Avenue, Montreal, QC, H3G 1A4, Canada.
Dev JayaramanDepartment of Internal Medicine, McGill University and McGill University Health Centre, 1650 Cedar Avenue, Montreal, QC, H3G 1A4, Canada.
Bruno PetrucciDepartment of Quality, Evaluation, Performance and Ethics, Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke, 3001, 12e Avenue Nord, Sherbrooke, QC, J1H 5N4, Canada.
Patricia LefebvreDepartment of Quality, Patient Safety and Performance, McGill University Health Centre, 2155 Guy Street, Montreal, QC, H3H 2R9, Canada.
McGill University Health Centre · CAUniversité de Sherbrooke · CACentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke · CA

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdverse events (AEs) in acute care hospitals are frequent and associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and costs. Measuring AEs is necessary for quality improvement and benchmarking purposes, but current detection methods lack in accuracy, efficiency, and generalizability. The growing availability of electronic health records (EHR) and the development of natural language processing techniques for encoding narrative data offer an opportunity to develop potentially better methods. The purpose of this study is to determine the accuracy and generalizability of using automated methods for detecting three high-incidence and high-impact AEs from EHR data: a) hospital-acquired pneumonia, b) ventilator-associated event and, c) central line-associated bloodstream infection.

methodsThis validation study will be conducted among medical, surgical and ICU patients admitted between 2013 and 2016 to the Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke (CHUS) and the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC), which has both French and English sites. A random 60% sample of CHUS patients will be used for model development purposes (cohort 1, development set). Using a random sample of these patients, a reference standard assessment of their medical chart will be performed. Multivariate logistic regression and the area under the curve (AUC) will be employed to iteratively develop and optimize three automated AE detection models (i.e., one per AE of interest) using EHR data from the CHUS. These models will then be validated on a random sample of the remaining 40% of CHUS patients (cohort 1, internal validation set) using chart review to assess accuracy. The most accurate models developed and validated at the CHUS will then be applied to EHR data from a random sample of patients admitted to the MUHC French site (cohort 2) and English site (cohort 3)-a critical requirement given the use of narrative data -, and accuracy will be assessed using chart review. Generalizability will be determined by comparing AUCs from cohorts 2 and 3 to those from cohort 1. DISCUSSION: This study will likely produce more accurate and efficient measures of AEs. These measures could be used to assess the incidence rates of AEs, evaluate the success of preventive interventions, or benchmark performance across hospitals.

Indexed as

Catheterization, Central VenousCross InfectionElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHospitalizationHospitalsHumansIncidenceMaleNatural Language ProcessingPneumoniaQuality ImprovementRespiration, ArtificialAcute care hospitalAdverse eventsAutomated detectionData warehouseElectronic health recordNatural language processingPatient safety

Identifiers

PMID28209197
PMCPMC5314632
OpenAlexW2588968080

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.