ArticleClinical rheumatology2021
Pulse dose steroid experience among hospitalized patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a single-center feasibility study.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/
objectivesPulse intravenous (IV) methylprednisolone (MEP) is often used for severe SLE manifestations requiring hospitalization. However, the accuracy of pulse dose documentation extracted from the electronic health record (EHR) is unknown. We assessed the feasibility to study pulse steroid dosing among hospitalized patients with SLE at our institution.
methodUsing the Stanford Medicine Research Data Repository (STARR) extracted from the EHR, we identified patients with ≥ 1 SLE ICD code before/during hospitalization receiving steroids (1/2008-12/2017). SLE diagnosis required rheumatologist confirmation. For our feasibility study, we randomly sampled 40/747 patients meeting search criteria. Pulse IV MEP was defined as ≥ 200 mg. Pharmacy dispensation data required EHR confirmation.
resultsForty adult and pediatric subjects were identified, passing initial criteria screen; 6 pediatric patients were excluded as EHR pharmacy confirmation was unavailable. Of the 34 adults, 14 had SLE confirmed. Among 5 adult SLE patients with pulse documentation, 3 occurred while hospitalized, for the following indications: acute renal transplant rejection (2 patients, 2 hospitalizations) and lupus flare (1 patient, 2 hospitalizations). No discrepancies were observed in pharmacy dispensation documentation of pulse dosing between EHR and STARR for all 4 hospitalizations.
conclusionsAssessment of pulse steroid dose dispensation among hospitalized patients with SLE can be reliably ascertained from the extracted portion of the EHR designed for research. Reliance on a single ICD code for SLE in the EHR may lead to high rate of false-positive diagnoses of SLE among hospitalized patients. We document the importance of supplementing one ICD code with additional clinical information when confirming SLE diagnosis. Key Points • Assessment of pulse steroid dosing dispensation among hospitalized patients with SLE can be reliably determined from the extracted portion of the EHR designed for research purposes. • Reliance on a single ICD code contributes to a high rate of false positive diagnoses of SLE among hospitalized patients. • Supplementing ICD coding with additional clinical information is vital when confirming SLE 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.