Observational studyBMJ open2023
Accuracy of efficient data methods to determine the incidence of hospital-acquired thrombosis and major bleeding in medical and surgical inpatients: a multicentre observational cohort study in four UK hospitals.
Observational study in BMJ open, 2023. 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.
- Development and external validation of a text-matching algorithm to identify patients with lower extremity deep venous thrombosis from radiology reports at five medical centers.Thrombosis research · 2026Article
- National trends in venous thromboembolism incidence in Ireland (2015-2022): a retrospective analysis.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2026Observational
- Postoperative Bleeding Definitions as the Foundation of Hemostasis in Pediatric Cardiac Surgery.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Antithrombotic Therapy Discontinuation, Bleeding, and Thromboembolic Events in Patients With Cancer During the Last Phase of Life: Insights From Primary Care Records.Annals of family medicine · 2026Article
- Derivation and external validation of a portable method to identify patients with pulmonary embolism from radiology reports: The READ-PE algorithm.Thrombosis research · 2024Article
- Who dies from venous thromboembolism after hospitalisation for other reasons in England?: a national retrospective cohort study.BMJ open · 2024Article
- The role of health policy in the prevention of venous thromboembolism in the UK National Health Service-Learning from the past, looking to the future.Future healthcare journal · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe evaluated the accuracy of using routine health service data to identify hospital-acquired thrombosis (HAT) and major bleeding events (MBE) compared with a reference standard of case note review.
designA multicentre observational cohort study.
settingFour acute hospitals in the UK.
participantsA consecutive unselective cohort of general medical and surgical patients requiring hospitalisation for a period of >24 hours during the calendar year 2021. We excluded paediatric, obstetric and critical care patients due to differential risk profiles.
interventionsWe compared preidentified sources of routinely collected information (using hospital coding data and local contractually mandated thrombosis datasets) to data extracted from case notes using a predesigned workflow methodology. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We defined HAT as objectively confirmed venous thromboembolism occurring during hospital stay or within 90 days of discharge and MBE as per international consensus.
resultsWe were able to source all necessary routinely collected outcome data for 87% of 2008 case episodes reviewed. The sensitivity of hospital coding data (International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision, ICD-10) for the diagnosis of HAT and MBE was 62% (95% CI, 54 to 69) and 38% (95% CI, 27 to 50), respectively. Sensitivity improved to 81% (95% CI, 75 to 87) when using local thrombosis data sets.
conclusionsUsing routinely collected data appeared to miss a substantial proportion of outcome events, when compared with case note review. Our study suggests that currently available routine data collection methods in the UK are inadequate to support efficient study designs in venous thromboembolism research. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NIHR127454.
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.