ArticleBMJ open2021
Pulse oximetry and supplemental oxygen use in nationwide Veterans Health Administration hospitals, 2013-2017: a Veterans Affairs Patient Database validation study.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Practice of oxygen administration in patients hospitalized in internal medicine wards and intensive care units: A single-center prospective, observational study.Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina · 2025Observational
- Racial bias and reproducibility in pulse oximetry among medical and surgical inpatients in general care in the Veterans Health Administration 2013-19: multicenter, retrospective cohort study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveExtraction and standardisation of pulse oximetry and supplemental oxygen data from electronic health records has the potential to improve risk-adjustment, quality assessment and prognostication. We develop an approach to standardisation and report on its use for benchmarking purposes. MATERIALS AND
methodsUsing electronic health record data from the nationwide Veteran's Affairs healthcare system (2013-2017), we extracted, standardised and validated pulse oximetry and supplemental oxygen data for 2 765 446 hospitalisations in the Veteran's Affairs Patient Database (VAPD) cohort study. We assessed face, concurrent and predictive validities using the following approaches, respectively: (1) evaluating the stability of patients' pulse oximetry values during a 24-hour period, (2) testing for greater amounts of supplemental oxygen use in patients likely to need oxygen therapy and (3) examining the association between supplemental oxygen and subsequent mortality.
resultsWe found that 2 700 922 (98%) hospitalisations had at least one pulse oximetry reading, and 864 605 (31%) hospitalisations received oxygen therapy. Patients monitored by pulse oximetry had a reading on average every 6 hours (median 4; IQR 3-7). Patients on supplemental oxygen were older, white and male compared with patients not receiving oxygen therapy (p<0.001) and were more likely to have diagnoses of heart failure and chronic pulmonary diseases (p<0.001). The amount of supplemental oxygen for patients with at least three consecutive values recorded during a 24-hour period fluctuated by median 2 L/min (IQR: 2-3), and 81% of such triplets showed the same level of oxygen receipt.
conclusionOur approach to standardising pulse oximetry and supplemental oxygen data shows face, concurrent and predictive validities as the following: supplemental oxygen clusters in the range consistent with hospital wall-dispensed oxygen supplies (face validity); there are greater amounts of supplemental oxygen for certain clinical conditions (concurrent validity) and there is an association of supplemental oxygen with in-hospital and postdischarge mortality (predictive validity).
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.