ArticleCJC open2021
Detecting Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation and Atrial Flutter in the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network: First Steps.
Article in CJC open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA recent feasibility assessment of quality indicators for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (NVAF/AFL) identified the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network, a national outpatient electronic medical record (EMR) system, as a data source for measurement. As a first step, we adapted and validated an existing EMR case definition.
methodsA diagnosis of NVAF/AFL was defined using International Classification of Disease, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification codes (427.3) in either the physician billing, encounter diagnosis, or health condition fields. We identified all presumed cases in a single clinical site with the algorithm and selected a random sample of those who were presumed NVAF/AFL negative with the same algorithm. A chart audit diagnosis of "definite" NVAF/AFL was confirmed by electrocardiogram and nonvalvular diagnosis confirmed after echocardiogram, attending physician, or specialist letter review. To demonstrate face validity, clinical characteristics were compared for patients with and without NVAF/AFL.
resultsThe case definition identified a possible 184 patients with and 184 without NVAF/AFL. The case validation resulted in a sensitivity of 100% (95% confidence interval [CI], 100-100), specificity of 84.3% (95% CI, 78.8-89.9), and positive and negative predictive value of 74.7% (95% CI, 66.4-83.2) and 100% (95% CI 100-100), respectively. Patients with NVAF/AFL were older (63 vs 42 years) and had a higher proportion of cardiovascular comorbidities and relevant medications.
conclusionsWe think it is possible that with further validation work, NVAF/AFL can be accurately identified using this large pan-Canadian EMR system and used as a future tool to measure quality of care in the outpatient setting.
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.