ArticleCJC open2023
Validation of a Case Definition to Identify Patients Diagnosed With Cardiovascular Disease in Canadian Primary Care Practices.
Article in CJC open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Barriers to Accessing Vascular Surgery in Northern, Rural, and Remote Canadian Communities.CJC open · 2026Review
- Significant reverse association between dietary selenium intake and visceral adiposity in the CODING study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Performance of clinical prediction models for chronic kidney disease among people with diabetes: external validation using the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN).Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2025Article
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 at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of death globally. This study validates a primary care-based electronic medical record case definition for CVD. Methods: This retrospective, cross-sectional study explores electronic medical record data from 1574 primary care providers participating in the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network. A reference standard was created by reviewing medical records of a subset of patients in this network (n = 2017) for coronary artery disease (CAD), cerebrovascular disease (CeVD), and peripheral vascular disease (PVD). Together, these data produced a CVD reference. We applied validated case definitions to an active patient population (≥ 1 visit between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2019) to estimate prevalence using the exact binomial test (N = 689,301). Descriptive statistics, χ Results: The optimal CVD Case Definition 2 had a sensitivity of 68.5% (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 61.6%-74.8%), a specificity of 97.8% (95% CI: 97.0%-98.4%), a positive predictive value of 77.7% (95% CI: 71.6%-82.7%), and a negative predictive value of 96.5% (95% CI: 95.8%-97.1%). Included in this CVD definition was a strong CAD case definition with sensitivity of 91.6% (95% CI: 84.6%-96.1%), specificity of 98.3% (95% CI: 97.6%-98.8%), a PPV of 74.8% (95% CI: 67.8%-80.7%), and an NPV of 99.5% (95% CI: 99.1%-99.7%). This CVD definition also included CeVD and PVD case definitions with low sensitivity (77.6% and 36.6%) but high specificity (98.6% and 99.0%). The estimated prevalence of CVD among primary care patients is 11.2% (95% CI, 11.1%-11.3%; n = 77,064); the majority had CAD (6.4%). Conclusions: This study validated a definition of CVD and its component parts-CAD, CeVD, and PVD. Understanding the prevalence and disease burden for patients with CVD within primary care settings can improve prevention and disease management.
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.