ArticleClinical epidemiology2020
The Validity of Intracerebral Hemorrhage Diagnoses in the Danish Patient Registry and the Danish Stroke Registry.
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 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prior Dual Antiplatelet Therapy and Mortality After Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Danish Nationwide Cohort Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- Association Between Antihypertensive Treatment Discontinuation and the Development of Intracerebral Hemorrhage in Japanese Patients With Hypertension: The LIFE Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- Association of Antithrombotic Drug Use With Incident Intracerebral Hemorrhage Location.Neurology · 2024Article
- Cardiovascular Data Quality in the Danish National Patient Registry (1977-2024): A Systematic Review.Clinical epidemiology · 2024Review
- Association of Statin Use With Risk of Stroke Recurrence After Intracerebral Hemorrhage.Neurology · 2023Article
- Cardiovascular morbidity and all-cause mortality in patients with retinal vein occlusion: a Danish nationwide cohort study.The British journal of ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Major Cardiovascular Events After Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage by Hematoma Location.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Association Between Statin Use and Intracerebral Hemorrhage Location: A Nested Case-Control Registry Study.Neurology · 2023Article
- Positive Predictive Value of Non-Traumatic Bleeding Diagnoses in the Danish National Patient Register.Clinical epidemiology · 2023Article
- Association of Prior Intracerebral Hemorrhage With Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Trends in Incidence of Intracerebral Hemorrhage and Association With Antithrombotic Drug Use in Denmark, 2005-2018.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Validity of Simple Algorithms to Identify Recurrence of Intracerebral Hemorrhage in Two Danish Nationwide Registries.Clinical epidemiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo establish the validity of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) diagnoses in the Danish Stroke Registry (DSR) and the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR). PATIENTS AND
methodsBased on discharge summaries and brain imaging reports, we estimated the positive predictive value (PPV) of a first-ever diagnosis code for ICH (ICD-10, code I61) for all patients in the Region of Southern Denmark (1.2 million) during 2009-2017 according to either DNPR or DSR. We estimated PPVs for any non-traumatic ICH (a-ICH) and spontaneous ICH (s-ICH) alone (ie, without underlying structural cause). We also calculated the sensitivity of these diagnoses in each of the registers. Finally, we classified the location of verified s-ICH.
resultsA total of 3,956 patients with ICH diagnosis codes were studied (DSR only: 87; DNPR only: 1,513; both registries: 2,356). In the DSR, the PPVs were 86.5% (95% CI=85.1-87.8) for a-ICH and 81.8% (95% CI=80.2-83.3) for s-ICH. The PPVs in DNPR (discharge code, primary diagnostic position) were 76.2% (95% CI=74.7-77.6) for a-ICH and 70.2% (95% CI=68.6-71.8) for s-ICH. Sensitivity for a-ICH and s-ICH was 76.4% (95% CI=74.8-78.0) and 78.7% (95% CI=77.1-80.2) in DSR, and 87.3% (95% CI=86.0-88.5) and 87.7% (95% CI=86.3-88.9) in DNPR. The location of verified s-ICH was lobar (39%), deep (33.6%), infratentorial (13.2%), large unclassifiable (11%), isolated intraventricular (1.9%), or unclassifiable due to insufficient information (1.3%).
conclusionThe validity of a-ICH diagnoses is high in both registries. For s-ICH, PPV was higher in DSR, while sensitivity was higher in DNPR. The location of s-ICH was similar to distributions seen in other populations.
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.