Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29202795›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2017

Validation of an algorithm that determines stroke diagnostic code accuracy in a Japanese hospital-based cancer registry using electronic medical records.

Yasufumi Gon, Daijiro Kabata, Keichi Yamamoto, Ayumi Shintani, Kenichi Todo, Hideki Mochizuki, Manabu Sakaguchi

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Additive association of blood pressure and short stature with stroke incidence in 450,000 Japanese adults: the Shizuoka study.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2024
    Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yasufumi GonDepartment of Neurology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2, Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan. gon@neurol.med.osaka-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3907-1741
Daijiro KabataDepartment of Medical Statistics, Osaka City University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Keichi YamamotoDepartment of Drug and Food Clinical Evaluation, Osaka City University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Ayumi ShintaniDepartment of Medical Statistics, Osaka City University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Kenichi TodoDepartment of Neurology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2, Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Hideki MochizukiDepartment of Neurology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2, Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Manabu SakaguchiDepartment of Neurology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2, Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
The University of Osaka · JPOsaka City University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to validate an algorithm that determines stroke diagnostic code accuracy, in a hospital-based cancer registry, using electronic medical records (EMRs) in Japan.

methodsThe subjects were 27,932 patients enrolled in the hospital-based cancer registry of Osaka University Hospital, between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2015. The ICD-10 (international classification of diseases, 10th revision) diagnostic codes for stroke were extracted from the EMR database. Specifically, subarachnoid hemorrhage (I60); intracerebral hemorrhage (I61); cerebral infarction (I63); and other transient cerebral ischemic attacks and related syndromes and transient cerebral ischemic attack (unspecified) (G458 and G459), respectively. Diagnostic codes, both "definite" and "suspected," and brain imaging information were extracted from the database. We set the algorithm with the combination of the diagnostic code and/or the brain imaging information, and manually reviewed the presence or absence of the acute cerebrovascular disease with medical charts.

resultsA total of 2654 diagnostic codes, 1991 "definite" and 663 "suspected," were identified. After excluding duplicates, the numbers of "definite" and "suspected" diagnostic codes were 912 and 228, respectively. The proportion of the presence of the disease in the "definite" diagnostic code was 22%; this raised 51% with the combination of the diagnostic code and the use of brain imaging information. When adding the interval of when brain imaging was performed (within 30 days and within 1 day) to the diagnostic code, the proportion increased to 84% and 90%, respectively. In the algorithm of "definite" diagnostic code, history of stroke was the most common in the diagnostic code, but in the algorithm of "definite" diagnostic code and the use of brain imaging within 1 day, stroke mimics was the most frequent.

conclusionsCombining the diagnostic code and clinical examination improved the proportion of the presence of disease in the diagnostic code and achieved appropriate accuracy for research. Clinical research using EMRs require outcome validation prior to conducting a study.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsInternational Classification of DiseasesNeoplasmsAdultAgedElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHospitals, UniversityHumansMaleMiddle AgedRegistriesStrokeClinical researchDiagnostic codeElectronic medical recordValidation

Identifiers

PMID29202795
PMCPMC5715513
OpenAlexW2773591368

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.