ArticleHospital pediatrics2023
Community Validation of an Approach to Detect Delayed Diagnosis of Appendicitis in Big Databases.
Article in Hospital pediatrics, 2023. 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.
- Characterizing Inequities in Pediatric Appendicitis Delayed Diagnosis and Perforation.Journal of pediatrics. Clinical practice · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDetection of delayed diagnosis using administrative databases may illuminate the healthcare settings at highest risk. A method for detection of delays in claims has been validated in children's hospitals. We sought to further validate the method in community emergency departments (EDs).
methodsWe studied patients <21 years old diagnosed with appendicitis from 2008 to 2019 in 8 eastern Massachusetts EDs. Eligible patients had 2 ED encounters within 7 days, the second with an appendicitis diagnosis. Delayed diagnosis was evaluated in medical records by trained reviewers. A previously validated trigger tool was applied to participants' electronic medical record data. The tool used data elements included in administrative data, including initial encounter diagnoses, time between encounters, presence of medical complexity, and ultimate length of stay. The tool assigned a probability of delayed diagnosis for each patient. Test characteristics at 4 confidence thresholds were determined, and the area under the receiver operating curve was calculated.
resultsWe analyzed 68 children with 2 encounters leading to a diagnosis of appendicitis (i.e., possible delay). When assigning a delayed diagnosis prediction to patients at 4 thresholds of confidence (>0%, >50%, >75%, and >90% confident), the positive predictive values were respectively 74%, 89%, 92%, and 89%; the negative predictive values were respectively 100%, 57%, 50%, and 33%. The area under the receiver operating curve was 0.837 (95% confidence interval 0.719-0.954).
conclusionsA trigger tool that identifies delays in diagnosis using only administrative data in community EDs has a high positive predictive value for true delay. The tool may be applied in community EDs.
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.