ArticleAllergy, asthma & immunology research2018
Are Registration of Disease Codes for Adult Anaphylaxis Accurate in the Emergency Department?
Article in Allergy, asthma & immunology research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of a machine learning algorithm based on administrative claims data for identification of ED anaphylaxis patient visits.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global · 2023Article
- Article
- Machine Learning Approach for Active Vaccine Safety Monitoring.Journal of Korean medical science · 2021Article
- Common causes of emergency department visits for anaphylaxis in Korean community hospitals: A cross-sectional study.Medicine · 2019Article
- Missed Registration of Disease Codes for Pediatric Anaphylaxis at the Emergency Department.Emergency medicine international · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThere has been active research on anaphylaxis, but many study subjects are limited to patients registered with anaphylaxis codes. However, anaphylaxis codes tend to be underused. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of anaphylaxis code registration and the clinical characteristics of accurate and inaccurate anaphylaxis registration in anaphylactic patients.
methodsThis retrospective study evaluated the medical records of adult patients who visited the university hospital emergency department between 2012 and 2016. The study subjects were divided into the groups with accurate and inaccurate anaphylaxis codes registered under anaphylaxis and other allergy-related codes and symptom-related codes, respectively.
resultsAmong 211,486 patients, 618 (0.29%) had anaphylaxis. Of these, 161 and 457 were assigned to the accurate and inaccurate coding groups, respectively. The average age, transportation to the emergency department, past anaphylaxis history, cancer history, and the cause of anaphylaxis differed between the 2 groups. Cutaneous symptom manifested more frequently in the inaccurate coding group, while cardiovascular and neurologic symptoms were more frequently observed in the accurate group. Severe symptoms and non-alert consciousness were more common in the accurate group. Oxygen supply, intubation, and epinephrine were more commonly used as treatments for anaphylaxis in the accurate group. Anaphylactic patients with cardiovascular symptoms, severe symptoms, and epinephrine use were more likely to be accurately registered with anaphylaxis disease codes.
conclusionsIn case of anaphylaxis, more patients were registered inaccurately under other allergy-related codes and symptom-related codes rather than accurately under anaphylaxis disease codes. Cardiovascular symptoms, severe symptoms, and epinephrine treatment were factors associated with accurate registration with anaphylaxis disease codes in patients with anaphylaxis.
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.