Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30406495›Full record

ArticleSurgery today2019

Initial verification of data from a clinical database of gastroenterological surgery in Japan.

Shingo Kanaji, Arata Takahashi, Hiroaki Miyata, Shigeru Marubashi, Yoshihiro Kakeji, Hiroyuki Konno, Mitsukazu Gotoh, Yasuyuki Seto

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgery today, 2019. 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
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Surgically treated gastric cancer in Japan: 2011 annual report of the national clinical database gastric cancer registry.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2021
    Article
  19. Review
  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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shingo KanajiThe Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery, National Clinical Database Data Quality Management Subcommittee, 3-1-17, Mita, Minato‑ku, Tokyo, 108‑0073, Japan. kanashin@med.kobe-u.ac.jp.
Arata TakahashiThe Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery, National Clinical Database Data Quality Management Subcommittee, 3-1-17, Mita, Minato‑ku, Tokyo, 108‑0073, Japan.
Hiroaki MiyataThe Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery, Database Committee, 3-1-17, Mita, Minato‑ku, Tokyo, 108‑0073, Japan.
Shigeru MarubashiThe Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery, National Clinical Database Data Quality Management Subcommittee, 3-1-17, Mita, Minato‑ku, Tokyo, 108‑0073, Japan.
Yoshihiro KakejiThe Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery, National Clinical Database Data Quality Management Subcommittee, 3-1-17, Mita, Minato‑ku, Tokyo, 108‑0073, Japan.
Hiroyuki KonnoThe Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery, Database Committee, 3-1-17, Mita, Minato‑ku, Tokyo, 108‑0073, Japan.
Mitsukazu GotohThe Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery, Database Committee, 3-1-17, Mita, Minato‑ku, Tokyo, 108‑0073, Japan.
Yasuyuki SetoThe Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery, Database Committee, 3-1-17, Mita, Minato‑ku, Tokyo, 108‑0073, Japan.
The Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery · JPJNC (Japan) · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposesTo evaluate the reliability of data collected from the gastroenterological section of the National Clinical Database of Japan (NCD), which began registrations in 2011 with ten surgical subspecialty societies.

methodsDuring 2014 and 2015, 1,136,700 cases involving 115 procedures at 4374 hospitals were registered in the gastroenterological surgery section of the NCD. After a test audit using the 2014 data, 17 hospitals were selected for the first audit and data verification for 2015. The data accuracy of patient demographics, surgical outcomes, and processes was assessed using 45 items from the cases registered, in comparison with the medical records.

resultsIn the first audit of the 2015 data, case registration accuracy verification involved 338 patients (99.4% of the extracted cases). The data accuracy with the maximum postoperative variables was > 95%. Accuracy of the mortality and status 30 days after the surgery was high (> 99%) with a sensitivity of 1.00 and a specificity of 1.00. Among the six complications studied, the recorded cases had high specificity but lower sensitivity (0.70-0.89).

conclusionsWe verified the data from the gastroenterological section of the NCD and found high accuracy of data entry.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualDigestive System Surgical ProceduresGastroenterologyRegistriesFemaleHospitalsHumansJapanMaleMedical AuditMedical RecordsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityTime FactorsAuditGastrointestinal surgeryNational clinical databaseNationwide web-based databaseStatistics

Identifiers

PMID30406495
OpenAlexW2900092679

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.