Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30123006›Full record

ArticleClinical epidemiology2018

Intracerebral hemorrhage: positive predictive value of diagnosis codes in two nationwide Danish registries.

Stine Munk Hald, Christine Kring Sloth, Sabine Morris Hey, Charlotte Madsen, Nina Nguyen, Luis Alberto García Rodríguez, Rustam Al-Shahi Salman, Sören Möller, Frantz Rom Poulsen, Anton Pottegård and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors.

Stine Munk HaldDepartment of Neurology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark, dgaist@health.sdu.dk.
Christine Kring SlothDepartment of Neurology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark, dgaist@health.sdu.dk.
Sabine Morris HeyDepartment of Neurology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark, dgaist@health.sdu.dk.
Charlotte MadsenDepartment of Neurology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark, dgaist@health.sdu.dk.
Nina NguyenDepartment of Radiology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Luis Alberto García RodríguezSpanish Centre for Pharmacoepidemiologic Research (CEIFE), Madrid, Spain.
Rustam Al-Shahi SalmanCentre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Sören MöllerDepartment of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark, dgaist@health.sdu.dk.
Frantz Rom PoulsenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Anton PottegårdClinical Pharmacology and Pharmacy, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
David GaistDepartment of Neurology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark, dgaist@health.sdu.dk.

Funding

Medical Research Council G1002605
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this study is to establish the validity of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) diagnoses in the Danish Stroke Registry (DSR) and the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR). PATIENTS AND

methodsWe estimated the positive predictive value (PPV) of ICH diagnoses for a sample of 500 patients from the DSR (patients recorded under ICH diagnosis) and DNPR (International Classification of Diseases, version 10, code I61) during 2010-2015, using discharge summaries and brain imaging reports (minimal data). We estimated PPVs for any ICH (a-ICH) and spontaneous ICH (s-ICH) alone. Furthermore, we assessed PPVs according to whether patients were recorded in both or only one of the registries. Finally, in a subsample with ICH diagnoses with access to full medical records and original imaging studies (extensive data, n=100), we compared s-ICH diagnosis and hemorrhage location after use of extensive vs minimal data.

resultsIn the DSR, the PPVs were 94% (95% CI, 91%-96%) for a-ICH and 85% (95% CI, 81%-88%) for s-ICH. In the DNPR, the PPVs were 88% (95% CI, 84%-91%) for a-ICH and 75% (95% CI, 70%-79%) for s-ICH. PPVs for s-ICH for patients recorded in both registries, DSR only, and DNPR only were 86% (95% CI, 82-99), 80% (95%CI, 71-87), and 49% (95%CI, 39-59), respectively. Evaluation of extensive vs minimal data verified s-ICH diagnosis in 98% and hemorrhage location in 94%.

conclusionThe validity of a-ICH diagnoses in DSR and DNPR is sufficiently high to support their use in epidemiologic studies. For s-ICH, validity was high in DSR. In DNPR, s-ICH validity was lower, markedly so for the small subgroup of patients only recorded in this registry. Minimal data including discharge summaries and brain imaging reports were feasible and valid for identifying ICH location.

Indexed as

epidemiologyintracranial hemorrhageregister-based researchstroke

Identifiers

PMID30123006
PMCPMC6086098

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.