ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2022
Accuracy and agreement of national spine register data for 474 patients compared to corresponding electronic patient records.
Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The validity of electronic health data for measuring smoking status: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Pooled it
- Response to the Letter to the Editor for "The First Wave: National Adoption and Economic Shifts of Posterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion in Hospital-Owned Ambulatory Surgery Centers".Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Article
- Validity and accuracy of swespine data on surgery for central lumbar spinal stenosis and lumbar disc herniation: a cohort study of 796 patients.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025Article
- Characterising patients undergoing surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis associated neurogenic claudication in the UK: what does the British Spinal Registry tell us?European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025Article
- Reliability of surgeon-reported MRI findings to a national spine register.Acta neurochirurgica · 2025Article
- Introducing a standardised register for strengthening the inpatient management of newborns and sick children: Implementation research in selected health facilities of Bangladesh.Journal of global health · 2024Article
- Postoperative complications after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis, assessment using two different data sources.Acta neurochirurgica · 2024Article
- Long-term comparison of anterior (ALIF) versus transforaminal (TLIF) lumbar interbody fusion: a propensity score-matched register-based study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024Article
- Benefits of lumbar spine fusion surgery reach 10 years with various surgical indications.North American Spine Society journal · 2023Article
- Designing a minimum data set for the information management system (registry) of spinal canal stenosis: An applied-descriptive study.Health science reports · 2023Article
- The Norwegian registry for spine surgery (NORspine): cohort profile.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2023Article
- Excellent agreement of Norwegian trauma registry data compared to corresponding data in electronic patient records.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2023Article
- Characteristics and outcomes of patients who did not respond to a national spine surgery registry.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- Complications associated to wound drainages in tumor spine surgery: a multicenter surveillance study from the German Spine Registry (DWG-Register).Scientific reports · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeData quality is essential for all types of research, including health registers. However, data quality is rarely reported. We aimed to assess the accuracy of data in a national spine register (NORspine) and its agreement with corresponding data in electronic patient records (EPR).
methodsWe compared data in NORspine registry against data in (EPR) for 474 patients operated for spinal stenosis in 2015 and 2016 at four public hospitals, using EPR as the gold standard. We assessed accuracy using the proportion correctly classified (PCC) and sensitivity. Agreement was quantified using Kappa statistics or interaclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
resultsThe mean age (SD) was 66 (11) years, and 54% were females. Compared to EPR, surgeon-reported perioperative complications displayed weak agreement (kappa (95% CI) = 0.51 (0.33-0.69)), PCC of 96%, and a sensitivity (95% CI) of 40% (23-58%). ASA classification had a moderate agreement (kappa (95%CI) = 0.73 (0.66-0.80)). Comorbidities were underreported in NORspine. Perioperative details had strong to excellent agreements (kappa (95% CI) ranging from 0.76 ( 0.68-0.84) to 0.98 (0.95-1.00)), PCCs between 93% and 99% and sensitivities (95% CI) between 92% (0.84-1.00%) and 99% (0.98-1.00%). Patient-reported variables (height, weight, smoking) had excellent agreements (kappa (95% CI) between 0.93 (0.89-0.97) and 0.99 (0.98-0.99)).
conclusionCompared to electronic patient records, NORspine displayed weak agreement for perioperative complications, moderate agreement for ASA classification, strong agreement for perioperative details, and excellent agreement for height, weight, and smoking. NORspine underreported perioperative complications and comorbidities when compared to EPRs. Patient-recorded data were more accurate and should be preferred when available.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34989877What 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.