ArticleClinical epidemiology2020
Development and Evaluation of a Prediction Model for Ascertaining Rheumatic Heart Disease Status in Administrative Data.
Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardiovascular outcomes for Australian women with rheumatic heart disease during pregnancy: A retrospective linked data analysis, 2002-2017.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- The epidemiology of acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease in Queensland, 2017-2021: a population-level cohort study using linked administrative data.The Medical journal of Australia · 2025Article
- Article
- Observational
- Excess Deaths Associated with Rheumatic Heart Disease, Australia, 2013-2017.Emerging infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Population-based assessment of cardiovascular complications of rheumatic heart disease in Fiji: a record-linkage analysis.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Cohort profile: methodology and cohort characteristics of the Aotearoa New Zealand Rheumatic Heart Disease Registry.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Long-term outcomes following rheumatic heart disease diagnosis in Australia.European heart journal open · 2021Article
- The use of cardiac valve procedures for rheumatic heart disease in Australia; a cross-sectional study 2002-2017.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2020Article
- Contemporary Incidence and Prevalence of Rheumatic Fever and Rheumatic Heart Disease in Australia Using Linked Data: The Case for Policy Change.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2020Article
- Case Ascertainment on Australian Registers for Acute Rheumatic Fever and Rheumatic Heart Disease.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious research has raised substantial concerns regarding the validity of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) codes (ICD-10 I05-I09) for rheumatic heart disease (RHD) due to likely misclassification of non-rheumatic valvular disease (non-rheumatic VHD) as RHD. There is currently no validated, quantitative approach for reliable case ascertainment of RHD in administrative hospital data.
methodsA comprehensive dataset of validated Australian RHD cases was compiled and linked to inpatient hospital records with an RHD ICD code (2000-2018, n=7555). A prediction model was developed based on a generalized linear mixed model structure considering an extensive range of demographic and clinical variables. It was validated internally using randomly selected cross-validation samples and externally. Conditional optimal probability cutpoints were calculated, maximising discrimination separately for high-risk versus low-risk populations.
resultsThe proposed model reduced the false-positive rate (FPR) from acute rheumatic fever (ARF) cases misclassified as RHD from 0.59 to 0.27; similarly for non-rheumatic VHD from 0.77 to 0.22. Overall, the model achieved strong discriminant capacity (AUC: 0.93) and maintained a similar robust performance during external validation (AUC: 0.88). It can also be used when only basic demographic and diagnosis data are available.
conclusionThis paper is the first to show that not only misclassification of non-rheumatic VHD but also of ARF as RHD yields substantial FPRs. Both sources of bias can be successfully addressed with the proposed model which provides an effective solution for reliable RHD case ascertainment from hospital data for epidemiological disease monitoring and policy evaluation.
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.