Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30657530›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2019

Association of Adverse Effects of Medical Treatment With Mortality in the United States: A Secondary Analysis of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study.

Jacob E Sunshine, Nicholas Meo, Nicholas J Kassebaum, Michael L Collison, Ali H Mokdad, Mohsen Naghavi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jacob E SunshineDepartment of Anesthesiology & Pain Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle.
Nicholas MeoDepartment of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle.
Nicholas J KassebaumInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle.
Michael L CollisonInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle.
Ali H MokdadInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle.
Mohsen NaghaviInstitute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle.
Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation · USSeattle Children's Hospital · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: More than 20 years have passed since the first publication of estimates of the extent of medical harm occurring in hospitals in the United States. Since then, considerable resources have been allocated to improve patient safety, yet policymakers lack a clear gauge of the progress made. Objectives: To quantify the cause-specific mortality associated with adverse effects of medical treatment (AEMT) in the United States from 1990 to 2016 by age group, sex, and state of residence and to describe trends in types of harm and associations with other diseases and injuries. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cohort study using 1990-2016 data on mortality due to AEMT from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors (GBD) 2016 study, which assessed death certificates of US decedents. Exposures: Death with International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-coded registration. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality associated with AEMT. Secondary analyses were performed on all ICD codes in the death certificate's causal chain to describe associations between AEMT and other diseases and injuries. Results: From 1990 to 2016, there were an estimated 123 603 deaths (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 100 856-163 814 deaths) with AEMT as the underlying cause. Despite an overall increase in the number of deaths due to AEMT over time, the national age-standardized mortality rate due to AEMT decreased by 21.4% (95% UI, 1.3%-32.2%) from 1.46 (95% UI, 1.09-1.76) deaths per 100 000 population in 1990 to 1.15 (95% UI, 1.00-1.60) deaths per 100 000 population in 2016. Men and women had similar rates of AEMT mortality, and those 70 years or older had mortality rates nearly 20-fold greater compared with those aged 15 to 49 years (mortality rate in 2016 for both sexes, 7.93 [95% UI, 7.23-11.45] per 100 000 population for those aged ≥70 years vs 0.38 [95% UI, 0.34-0.43] per 100 000 population for those aged 15-49 years). Per 100 000 population, California had the lowest age-standardized AEMT mortality rate at 0.84 deaths (95% UI, 0.57-1.47 deaths), whereas Mississippi had the highest mortality rate at 1.67 deaths (95% UI, 1.19-2.03 deaths). Surgical and perioperative events were the most common subtype of AEMT, accounting for 63.6% of all deaths for which an AEMT was identified as the underlying cause. Conclusions and Relevance: This study's findings suggest a modest reduction in the mortality rate associated with AEMT in the United States from 1990 to 2016 while also observing increased mortality associated with advancing age and noted geographic variability. The annual GBD releases may allow for tracking of the burden of AEMT in the United States.

Indexed as

Age DistributionCause of DeathFemaleHumansMaleMedical ErrorsRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsSex DistributionUnited States

Identifiers

PMID30657530
PMCPMC6484545
OpenAlexW2909991483

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.