ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Validity of Administrative Data for Identifying Birth-Related Outcomes with the End Date of Pregnancy in a Japanese University Hospital.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Medication use during pregnancy in Japan from 2005 to 2019: Trends and safety considerations.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
- Benzodiazepine exposure during early pregnancy and risk of miscarriage: dose-response, half-life classification, and individual agents.Archives of women's mental health · 2026Article
- Appropriate definition of childbirth using Japanese administrative database: a cross-sectional cohort validation study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Postpartum diabetes screening for women with gestational diabetes in Japan: an administrative database study.BMJ open · 2025Article
- [Frequency of episiotomy practice in an institution in Quito, Ecuador 2009-2022].Revista colombiana de obstetricia y ginecologia · 2024Article
- Evaluation of Cesarean Rates for Term, Singleton, Live Vertex Deliveries in China in 2020 Among Women With No Prior Cesarean Delivery.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Pharmacotherapy during Pregnancy, Childbirth, and Lactation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 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
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to develop and validate claims-based algorithms for identifying live birth, fetal death, and cesarean section by utilizing administrative data from a university hospital in Japan. We included women who visited the Department of Obstetrics at a university hospital in 2018. The diagnosis, medical procedures, and medication data were used to identify potential cases of live birth, fetal death, and cesarean section. By reviewing electronic medical records, we evaluated the positive predictive values (PPVs) and the accuracy of the end date of pregnancy for each claims datum. "Selected algorithm 1" based on PPVs and "selected algorithm 2" based on both the PPVs and the accuracy of the end date of pregnancy were developed. A total of 1757 women were included, and the mean age was 32.8 years. The PPVs of "selected algorithm 1" and "selected algorithm 2" were both 98.1% for live birth, 99.0% and 98.9% for fetal death, and 99.7% and 100.0% for cesarean section, respectively. These findings suggest that the developed algorithms are useful for future studies for evaluating live birth, fetal death, and cesarean section with an accurate end date of pregnancy.
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.