ArticlePloS one2020
Uncertainty in classification of death from fatal myocardial infarction: A nationwide analysis of regional variation in incidence and diagnostic support.
Article in PloS one, 2020. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Socioeconomic Inequality and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Cardiovascular mortality in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease with and without diabetes: a nationwide cohort study.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2023Article
- Identification of crucial genes that induce coronary atherosclerosis through endothelial cell dysfunction in AMI-identifying hub genes by WGCNA.American journal of translational research · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe usefulness of mortality statistics relies on the validity of death certificate diagnosis. However, diagnosing the causal sequence of conditions leading to death is not simple. We examined diagnostic support for fatal acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and investigated its association with regional variation. METHODS AND
resultsFrom Danish nationwide registers, we identified the study population (N = 3,244,051) of whom 36,669 individuals were recorded with AMI as the underlying cause-of-death between 2002 and 2015. We included clinical diagnoses, procedures, and claimed prescriptions related to atherosclerotic disease to evaluate the level of diagnostic support for fatal AMI in three diagnostic groups (Definite; Plausible; Uncertain). Adjusted mortality rates, rate ratios, and odds ratios were estimated for each AMI category, stratified by hospital region using multivariable regression models. More than one-third (N = 12,827, 35%) of deaths reported as fatal AMI had uncertain diagnostic support. The largest regional variation in AMI mortality rate ratios, varying from 1.16 (95%CI:1.02;1.31) to 1.62 (95%CI:1.43;1.83), was found among cases with uncertain diagnostic supportive data. Substantial inter-regional differences in the degree to which death occurs outside hospital [OR: 1.01 (95%CI:0.92;1.12) - 1.49 (95%CI:1.36;1.63)] and general practitioners determining the cause-of-death at home were present. Minor regional differences [OR: 0.96 (95%CI:0.85;1.07) - 1.16 (95%CI:1.04;1.29)] in in-hospital AMI mortality were observed.
conclusionThere is significant regional variation associated with recording AMI as a cause-of-death. This variation is predominately based on death certificate diagnoses without diagnostic supportive evidence. Studies of fatal AMI should include a stratification on supportive evidence of the diagnosis.
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.