Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35552817›Full record

ReviewSurgery today2022

Validity of operative information in Japanese administrative data: a chart review-based analysis of 1221 cases at a single institution.

Takaaki Konishi, Takako Yoshimoto, Michimasa Fujiogi, Hayato Yamana, Masahiko Tanabe, Yasuyuki Seto, Hideo Yasunaga

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Surgery today, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
10.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Takaaki KonishiDepartment of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan. takaakonishi-ncd@umin.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9538-4419
Takako YoshimotoDepartment of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan.
Michimasa FujiogiDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Health Economics, School of Public Health, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan.
Hayato YamanaDepartment of Health Services Research, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan.
Masahiko TanabeDepartment of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan.
Yasuyuki SetoDepartment of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan.
Hideo YasunagaDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Health Economics, School of Public Health, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan.
The University of Tokyo · JPDepartment of Health · IEHarvard University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the validity of operative information recorded in the Diagnosis Procedure Combination (DPC) database, a national inpatient database including administrative claims data.

methodsWe reviewed the medical charts of 1221 patients who underwent one of six surgeries (breast, esophageal, gastric, thyroid cancer surgery, appendectomy, or inguinal hernia repair) at a surgery department of a university hospital from April 2016 to March 2019. We compared operative information (type, date, laterality of procedure; type of anesthesia; transfusion; and duration of anesthesia) recorded in the DPC database with the information recorded in the medical charts.

resultsThe DPC data for type, date, laterality of surgery, and type of anesthesia were accurate in 99% of the reviewed patients. The sensitivity and specificity for identifying whether a patient received a transfusion procedure were 97.5% and 99.6%, respectively. Data regarding the duration of anesthesia in the DPC database were identical to those in medical chart records in 1114 of 1216 cases that received general or spinal anesthesia (91.5%). The duration of anesthesia in the DPC data was 53 min longer on average than the recorded operative time in the medical charts.

conclusionThe DPC database had high validity for operative information.

Indexed as

AnesthesiaHernia, InguinalDatabases, FactualHumansJapanAdministrative dataAnesthesiaProcedureSurgeryValidation

Identifiers

PMID35552817
OpenAlexW4280496786

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.