ArticleClinical epidemiology2021
Impact of the Look-Back Period on Identifying Recurrent Myocardial Infarctions in the Danish National Patient Registry.
Article in Clinical epidemiology, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of Left Truncation and Censoring When Changing the Use of theClinical epidemiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeStudies examining myocardial infarction (MI) often seek to include only incident MIs by excluding recurrent MIs. When based on historical data, identification of previous MI depends on the length of the look-back period. However, international registries often cover a short time period, consequently containing left-censored data, making it impossible to determine if a first MI in a period is truly an incident MI. We evaluated whether the proportion of MIs identified as recurrent MIs depends on the look-back period, and how including recurrent MIs in a planned incident MI cohort impacts survival estimates. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe used the Danish National Patient Registry, covering all Danish hospitals since 1977 to identify first MIs during 2010-2016 (index events). The hospital registry history preceding the index event was then searched for previous MIs. We plotted the proportion of index events identified as recurrent MIs as a function of the look-back period. Moreover, we calculated 5-year all-cause mortality and confidence intervals (CIs) using the 1-Kaplan-Meier method for five cohorts based on the index events and defined by look-back periods of 0, 5, 10, 20, and up to 39 years.
resultsAmong 63,885 index events, 3.4% were identified as recurrent MIs with 5 years of look-back, 7.9% with 10 years, 14% with 24 years, and 15% with up to 39 years. All-cause mortality risk was 36% (95% CI: 36-37%) with 0 years of look-back, 35% (95% CI: 35-36%) with 5 years, 35% (95% CI: 35-36%) with 10 years, 34% (95% CI: 34-35%) with 20 years, and 34% (95% CI: 33-34%) with up to 39 years.
conclusionMost recurrent MIs were identified with a look-back period of 24 years. Including recurrent MIs in a planned incident MI cohort, due to shorter look-back periods, overestimated the mortality risk.
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.