ArticleGesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany))2024
[Development and Internal Validation of Case Definitions for Prevalence Estimation of Microvascular Complications of Diabetes in Routine Data].
Article in Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)), 2024. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Agreement Between Diagnoses as Stated by Patients and Those Contained in Routine Health Insurance Data—Results of a Data Linkage Study.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurveillance of diabetes requires up-to-date information on the prevalence of diabetes and its complications over time. For this purpose, statutory health insurance (SHI) data is being increasingly used, as the data is available in a timely fashion and case numbers enable detailed estimates also of diabetes complications. The aim of the present study was the development and internal validation of case definitions for the prevalence estimation of diabetic retinopathy (DRP), diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) and diabetic foot syndrome (DFS).
methodsPersons with diabetes differentiated by type 1, type 2, and other diabetes in an age- and sex-stratified sample of persons insured by Barmer SHI in 2018 (n=72,744) comprised the study popuation. Based on the central ICD codes for microvascular complications (DRP: H36.0; DPN: G63.2; DFS: E1X.74/.75), case definitions were developed including additional ICD codes for complications without direct diabetes reference. Subsequently, the case definitions were internally validated. For the validation, coding in the inpatient setting (m1S) or repeatedly in the outpatient setting (m2Q) as well as coding of specific procedures (EBM, OPS) and drug prescriptions or by relevant specialists were considered. Additionally, we analysed the documentation of the diagnoses in the previous years.
resultsIn 2018, the prevalence of the central ICD codes was 8.4% for DRP (H36.0), 18.9% for DPN (G63.2) and 13.4% for DFS (E1X.74/.75). After inclusion of additional ICD codes in the case definition, prevalence increased significantly for DRP (9.6%) and DPN (20.7%), and barely for DFS (13.5%). Internal validation confirmed the majority of diagnoses (DRP: 96.7%; DPN: 96.5% DFS: 95.8%) and m2Q represented the most relevant criterion. When up to four previous years were considered, prevalences were up to 30% higher for DPN and DFS and up to 64% higher for DRP.
conclusionThe inclusion of additional ICD codes in the case definition of microvascular complications of diabetes appears meaningful, as this increases the sensitivity of the prevalence estimate. Internal validation suggests that the documented diagnoses are plausible. However, not all diagnoses are documented annually, leading to an underestimation of the prevalence using a cross-sectional study design of one year.
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.