Observational studyNPJ primary care respiratory medicine2018
Agreement between hospital and primary care on diagnostic labeling for COPD and heart failure in Toronto, Canada: a cross-sectional observational study.
Observational study in NPJ primary care respiratory medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Embedding "Smart" Disease Coding Within Routine Electronic Medical Record Workflow: Prospective Single-Arm Trial.JMIR medical informatics · 2020Article
- Insights into Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease as Critical Risk Factor for Cardiovascular Disease.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2020Review
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or heart failure (HF) are frequently cared for in hospital and in primary care settings. We studied labeling agreement for COPD and HF for patients seen in both settings in Toronto, Canada. This was a retrospective observational study using linked hospital-primary care electronic data from 70 family physicians. Patients were 20 years of age or more and had at least one visit in both settings between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2014. We recorded labeling concordance and associations with clinical factors. We used capture-recapture models to estimate the size of the populations. COPD concordance was 34%; the odds ratios (ORs) of concordance increased with aging (OR 1.84 for age 75+ vs. <65, 95% CI 0.92-3.69) and more inpatient admissions (OR 2.89 for 3+ visits vs. 0 visits, 95% CI 1.59-5.26). HF concordance was 33%; the ORs of concordance decreased with aging (OR 0.39 for 75+ vs. <65, 95% CI 0.18-0.86) and increased with more admissions (OR = 2.39; 95% CI 1.33-4.30 for 3+ visits vs. 0 visits). Based on capture-recapture models, 21-24% additional patients with COPD and 18-20% additional patients with HF did not have a label in either setting. The primary care prevalence was estimated as 748 COPD patients and 834 HF patients per 100,000 enrolled adult patients. Agreement levels for COPD and HF were low and labeling was incomplete. Further research is needed to improve labeling for these conditions.
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.